,  Of 

fir  i 

JUL    2    1968 

iBxms 

.C8T1 


BISHOP  DOANE  vs.  BISHOP  M'lLVAINE 


ON 


<£rforUf  &9*oloflg; 


EXHIBITED  IN  EXTRACTS  FKOM  THE  WRITINGS  OF  THE  DIOCESANS 
OF  NEW  JERSEY  AND  OF  OHIO. 


BT 

A   PRESBYTERIAN. 


"  One  Lord,  one  Faith,  one  Baptism." — Eph.  iv.  5. 
"  I  hear  that  there  be  divisions  among  you  ;  and  I  partly  believe  it." 

1  Cov.  xi.  18. 


JJuvUnjjton: 

J. L. ruwKLL,  rmsTEii. 

1843. 


THE  CONTROVERSY  IS  FORCED  UPON  US. 

"  At  length,  however,  it  was  thought  expedient  by  some,  that  the 
controversy  should  be  set  up  in  the  Church  of  this  land,  and  that 
the  publications  on  one  side,  viz:  that  of  the  Oxford  Divines,  should 
have  a  re-print  here.  Hence  the  far-famed  "  Tracts  for  the  Times" 
were  issued  from  the  press  of  New  York,  preceded  by  the  promise 
of  the  re-print  of  a  large  selection  of  other  English  publications  on 
the  same  side  of  the  question.  During  the  progress  of  these  works, 
the  most  zealous  efforts  have  been  made  to  commend  the  peculiarities 
of  Oxford  divinity  to  the  diligent  reading  and  confidential  reception 
of  the  clergy  and  laity  of  this  country.  Thus  has  the  contro- 
versy been  forced  upon  those,  who,  while  the  publications  were  con- 
fined to  a  transatlantic  Church,  and  only  introduced  among  us  by 
scanty  importations,  would  have  been  content  to  leave  it  with  those 
to  whom  it  especially  belonged,  however  deeply  convinced  them- 
selves, that  Oxford  divinity  was  most  justly  accused." — Bishop 
3fllvaine,  p.  10. 


"  I  feel  the  importance  of  that  Litany  •  That  it  may  please  thee  to  beat  down 
Satan  beneath  our  feet.'  The  signs  of  the  times  seem  to  indicate  that  the  Church 
of  England,  as  it  has  always  been  the  strong  hold  of  truth,  is  now  the  grand  ob- 
ject of  a  special  effort,  in  these  last  days,  of  the  Ruler  of  the  darkness  of  this 
world." — Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  23. 


"The  time  seems  at  hand,  when  we  shall  have  to  retreat  upon  the  strong- 
holds of  our  faith;  when  they  that  teach,  and  they  that  learn,  and  they  that 
keep  the  watch-tower,  or  go  forth  to  the  battle-field,  will  be  compelled  to  do  for 
a.  declining  Church,  what  for  an  advancing  one  the  Apostle  forbids  to  be  done: 
to  maintain  'the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ'  instead  of  'going  on 
unto  perfection  ;'  to  '  lay  again  the  foundation  of  repentance  from  dead  works, 
and  of  faith  towards  God  ;'  in  order  to  preserve  and  strengthen  and  encour- 
age those  -who  stand,  if  -we  may  not  renew  again  unto  repentance  those  that 
have  fallen  away.'" 


INTRODUCTION. 


I.  The  occasion  of  this  Compilation  on  Oxford  Theology. 

The  Compiler  of  these  extracts  having  recently  had  occasion  to  examine 
Bishop  M'llvaine's  work  on  Oxford  Theology,  (one  of  the  ablest,  most  inter- 
esting and  instructive  works  of  the  age)  was  struck  at  once  with  the  total  and 
irreconcilable  dissimilarity  between  his  views  and  those  of  Bishop  Doane.  This 
led  to  a  re-perusal  of  Bishop  Doane's  large  pamphlet,  ("Brief  Examination") 
in  connection  with  Bishop  M'llvaine's  book;  and  the  result  was  the  marking 
of  a  large  number  of  parallel*  passages.  These  are  collected  together  in  the 
following  pages. 

II.  The  object  of  this  Compilation. 

1.  To  exhibit.  Oxfordism  and  Romanism  in  contrast  with  evangelical  doc- 
trine— a  matter  of  great  importance  in  these  times  of  Popish  effort,  and  of 
crafty,  Tractarian  theology. 

2.  To  beseech  those  prelates  and  others,  who  boast  of  "one  church,"  "  one 
faith,"  "  one  Apostolic  succession,"  &c,  not  to  chaunt  their  plea  of  "  UNITY  " 
with  notes  of  discord.  Silence  would  be  far  more  becoming,  during  the  con- 
tinuance of  "  divisions^"  among  them,  which  are  as  serious  as  ever  afflicted  any 
Church,  in  any  age. 

3.  To  urge  Christians  of  all  "  denominations  "  to  renew  their  efforts  to  pre- 
sent the  spread  of  Popery,  or  its  equivalent,  within  the  limits  of  the  commu- 
nities in  which  Providence  has  placed  them. 

III.  The  manner  of  this  compilation. 

1.  The  sentences  are  generally  given  verbatim  et  literatim  from  the  two  wri- 
ters.    In  a  few  instances,  abbreviations  are  made,  without  affecting  the  sense. 

2.  In  some  cases,  the  words  of  authors,  whom  the  writers  quote  -with  appro- 
bation, are  inserted  in  connection  with  their  own.  This  is  done  to  bring  out 
their  respective  views  more  fully,  and  is  always  made  known  to  the  reader. 

3.  The  quotations  are  taken  from  passages,  which  discuss  the  same  subject ; 
and  consequently  the  passages  quoted  are  truly  *'  parallel  passages." 

4.  The  works  quoted  are  "Bishop  Doane's  Brief  Examination,"  and  "Bishop 
M'llvaine  on  Oxford  Divinity,"  unless  otherwise  mentioned. 

In  conclusion,  the  writer  may  be  permitted  to  state  that  the  compilation  is 
made  without  intending  the  slightest  disrespect,  personally,  towards  either  of 
the  two  divines,  thus  placed  in  antithetical  juxtaposition.  Although  the  Com- 
piler very  decidedly  agrees  with  one,  and  "dissents"  from  the  other,  he  con- 
siders himself  (as  the  moderator  of  the  Presbytery)  quite  impartial  in  the  man- 
agement of  the  discussion. 

The  remarks  inserted  by  the  Compiler,  to  illustrate  various  topics,  are  print- 
ed in  different  type,  and  run  across  the  page. 

Burlington,  J\".  J.,  January  12,  1813. 

*"  Parallel  "  may  be  understood  here  in  its  original  sense.  The  views  of  the 
the  two  writers,  however  indefinitely  extended,  never  meet. 


to  the  citizens  op  burlington,  n.  j. 

of  "all  denominations"  op  christians, 

these  pages, 

containing  extracts  from  the  writings 

of  bishof  doane,  the  gifted  and  distinguished  "  rector  of 
st.  mary's  church," 

AND 

OF    BISHOP    M'lLVAINE,    WHOSE    BIRTH-PLACE    WAS    OUR    CITY,    AND 

WHOSE  FAME  IS  "  IN  ALL  THE  CHURCHES," 

— DIOCESANS,   BOTH  WELL  KNOWN  IN  THIS  COMMUNITY  — 

ARE  RESPECTFULLY   INSCRIBED. 


Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

"  My  confidence  in  the  doctri-  "  Their  mode  of  representing 
nal  integrity  of  the  Oxford  vvri-  the  way  of  Salvation  is  "  ano- 
ters  continues  unshaken." — Br^f  ther  gospel "  to  us ;  another  to  the 
Ex.  p.  183.  Church  to  whose  doctrines  we  are 

pledged."—  Ox.  Div.  p.  509. 


OXFORD  THEOLOGY. 


In  ihe  following  pages,  the  reader  may  expect  to  find  a  brief  view 
of  the  Roman,  Oxford  and  Protestant  systems  of  religion,  in  refer- 
ence to  various  fundamental  points.  The  comparatively  little  dif- 
ference between  the  Roman  and  Oxford  systems,  and  the  vast  dif- 
ference between  both  and  that  of  the  Reformers,  will  abundantly 
appear  from  Bishop  M'llvaine's  remarks,  during  the  progress  of  the 

discussion. The  opinions  of  the  two  distinguished  divines,  from 

whose  writings  extracts  are  made,  are  classified  under  the  theologi- 
cal divisions,  characteristic  of  the  Popish  controversy.  Their  gene- 
ral opinions  in  regard  to  the  "  Oxford  movement"  and  its  Popish 
tendencies  are  first  given,  as  introductory  to  the  survey  of  the  sys- 
tem. 


(Keucral  cpfmou  ot  the  #pfortr  arractttrfmrs. 


Bishot  Doane. 

"As  Mr.  Palmer  says,  'the  learned 
and  religious  authors  of  the  Tracts  for 
the  Times  need  no  advocacy  but  their 
own-' "  p.  17. 

There  is  a  "  vast  amount  that  is 
most  timely  and  most  excellent  in  these 
calumniated  writings."  p.  10. 


"  The  Oxford  writers  are  such,  for 
piety,  integrity,  holiness,  heavenly- 
mindedness,  charity,  as  would  adorn 
the  purest  age  the  Church  has  ever 
known."  p.  5. 

"  Before  the  Oxford  Tracts  had  been 
read  at  all,  the  Trojan  horse  was  not 
regarded  as  a  more  pernicious  por- 
tent." p.  158. 


"  A  portion  of  them  were  reprinted  ; 
and  the  well-informed  said  at  once 
'  This  is  not  new  !  We  knew  all  this 
before!  These  are  the  old  Church 
principles,  stated  with  fairness,  and 
carried  out  to  their  just  conclusions  !' " 
p.  158. 

"  I  am  distressed  by  the  unworthy 
fears,  and  premature  misgivings,  and 


Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

"  I  am  fully  persuaded  that  with  a 
truly  Protestant  communion,  the  most 
direct  refutation  of  Oxford  divinity  is 
itself."  Pre/,  p.  1 1 . 

"It  would  be  singular  indeed  if 
works  so  voluminous  should  not  con- 
tain a  great  deal  of  useful  knowledge. 
Read  Cardinal  Bellarmine's  Defence 
of  Popery  !  May  not  as  much  be  said 
of  that  learned  champion  of  the  De- 
crees of  Trent?"  p.  12. 

"  The  whole  history  of  the  Church 
warns  us  against  forgetting  that  very 
good  and  sincere  men  may  set  on  foot 
great  errors — and  thus  inflict  an  injury 
of  which  worse  men  would  not  be  ca- 
pable." p.  25. 

"  Ten  years  of  open  attack  around 
the  walls  of  Troy  effected  nothing. 
But  one  day's  delusion  among  the 
wardens  at  her  gates ;  the  not  exam- 
ining what  lay  concealed  under  an  ap- 
pircnt  act  of  religion  betrayed  the 
city."  p.  30. 

"  What  the  Articles  and  Homilies 
so  distinctly  teach,  that  system  directly 
denies,  most  earnestly  condemns,  and 
most  indignantly  casts  away."  p.  343. 


"  I    am  deeply  impressed    with  the 
grave   importance  of  the   errors,  and 


Bishop  Doank. 
equivocating  censures  of  those,  whose 
indolence  has  kept  them  ignorant,  and 
whose  timidity  distrusts  the  truth."  p. 
181. 

"  The  summons  to  the  ancient  faith, 
the  ancient  discipline,  the  ancient  wor- 
ship ;  the  impulse  given  to  ancient 
piety,  and  ancient  holiness,  and  an- 
cient charity — these  will  remain  as 
blessings  to  mankind,  when  every 
name  that  has  been  mixed  up  in  this 
strife  of  tongues  shall  be  forgotten." 
English  Sermon,  p.  39. 

"To  the  multitude  of  honest  Chris- 
tians, who  love  the  truth,  and  who  are 
naturally  anxious  at  the  appearance  of 
division  and  disquiet,  it  may  suffice  to 
say  that  there  is  no  ground  for  anx- 
iety." p.  182. 


Bishop  M'Ilvaiwe. 

probable     evil    consequences    to    the 
Church,  of  Oxford  divinity."  p.  1. 


"  We  must  take  heed  :  there  may 
be  much  restoration  of  what  is  old  in 
this  system,  but  it  may  be  old  error, 
wearing  a  venerable  aspect  to  some, 
because  antiquated;  and  speaking 
words  of  wisdom  to  some,  because, 
like  the  prayers  of  some,  in  an  «?«- 
known  tongue.'''  p.  104. 


"  In  view  of  the  tendencies  of  Ox- 
ford divinity,  I  cannot  question  that 
its  certain  results,  if  time  and  room  be 
allowed,  will  be  the  driving  of  true  ho- 
liness from  God's  house,  and  the  sur- 
rounding of  its  altars  and  crowding  of 
its  courts,  with  the  '  wood,  hay  and 
stubble '  of  a  dead  formality,  which  the 
Lord,  when  he  cometh,  will  destroy 
with  the  breath  of  his  mouth."  p.  537. 

Whoever  reads  the  preceding  quotations  will  begin  to  suspect  that 
one  of  these  divines  sympathises  with  the  Tractarians,  and  that  the 
other  is  determined  to  bear  a  strong  testimony  against  them. 


<©«  the  3|opisfi  tentoncg  of  ©pfortofsw. 

The  blessings  of  the  Reformation,  brought  about,  under  God,  by 
Luther,  Cranmer,  Calvin,  &c,  are  so  great  and  inestimable,  that 
any  system,  which  tends  to  Popery,  will  be  generally  discounte- 
nanced by  Protestants,  as  a  fearful  and  calamitous  retrogradation. 
Hence,  the  only  way  to  encourage  the  progress  of  Oxfordism  in 
Protestant  communities  is  to  deny,  or  conceal,  its  Papistical  affinities. 
This  denial,  however,  does  not  always  succeed. 

"For  the  Oxford  writers,  nothing  "I  have  devoted  a  long  time  and  a 
need  be  asked,  but  that  they  bo  read.       great  deal  of  pains  to  the  study  of  the 


Just  in  proportion  as  this  is  done, 
the  outcry  against  them  will  be  dimin- 
ished.    Not  that  all  agree   with  them. 


system. 

And  I  am  constrained  to  say  that 
every  further  step  has  produced  but  a 
deeper  and  deeper  conviction  on  my 


Far  from  it !     But  that  the  charge  of    mind,  that  (whatever  the  intention  or 


Popery,  or  heresy,  is   seen   at  once  to 
be  EnnoNF.ous,  or  malicious."  p.  158. 


"  The  impression  is  produced  on  (he 
minds  of  the  truculent  on  the  one  hand, 
and  of  the  timid  on  the  other,  of  some 
great  overwhelming  crisis,  as  if  the 
Reformation  was  about  to  retrograde  I" 
p.  181. 


supposition  of  those  who  maintain  it) 
it  is  a  systematic  abandonment  of  the 
vital  and  distinguishing  features  of  the 
Protestant  faith,  and  a  systematic  adop- 
tion of  the  very  root  and  heart  of  Ro- 
manism." p.  14. 

"  The  difference  between  this  divi- 
nity and  the  true  divinity,  for  which 
our  Reformers  gave  themselves  to 
death,  is  a  difference  of  great  vital  doc- 
trine, not  of  one  doctrine  merely  but 
of  the  sy«tem  of  doctrine,  from  corner- 


Bishop  Doane. 


"  Oxford  broadsides  have  demolished 
the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  and  trans- 
substantiation  (as  she  holds  it,  with  an 
anathema  on  all  who  do  not  see  it  just 
as  she  does)  and  made  her  out  to  be  in 
6chism,  in  her  relation  to  the  Anglo- 
Catholic  Church !  A  pretty  Popery 
indeed  without  supremacy  and  tran- 
substantiation  !  A  very  harmless  mon- 
ster truly  !  A  Popery  without  a  Pope!" 
p.  24.i 

"  This  alone  must  quite  suffice  to  do 
away  forever  the  suspicion  of  Popery," 
p.  22.  this  outcry  against  the  Oxford 
writers,   as  teaching    Popery  !"  p.  29. 


"  Would  it  not  be  better  to  agree 
with  the  Quarterly  Review,  that  they 
who  condemn  the  Oxford  writings,  as 
favoring  Popery,'  '  are  speaking  in  ut- 
ter ignorance.' "  p.  35. 

"  Their  general  tendency  was  not 
(as  some  have  imagined)  to  establish 
the  dominion  and  superstitions  of 
Rome,  but  to  purify  and  invigorate  the 
Church  of  England,  and  to  edify  the 
whole  Catholic  Church."  p.  16. 


Bishop  M'Ilvainf. 

stone  to  roof — a  difference  which 
makes  so  great  a  gulf  between,  that 
according  to  the  Oxford  Divines  them- 
selves, it  makes  the  one  side,  or  the 
other,  'another  gospel.'  "  p.  178. 

"  The  fact  that  these  divines  have 
written  with  learning  against  some  of 
the  more  offensive  and  inconvenient 
developments  of  Popery,  (for  the  claim 
of  Papal  Supremacy  would  certainly 
be  quite  inconvenient  to  the  clergy  of 
England,  if  allowed)  puts  them  in  the 
precise  condition,  from  which,  if  they 
be  wrong  ....  they  will  operate  the 
more  covertly  and  dangerously  upon  the 
Protestant  community  around  them." 
p.  29. 

"  It  is  little  else  than  Popery  re- 
strained ;"  Pre/.  12 — "essentially  Ro- 
mish divinity  ;"  p.  18 — "it  is  of  the 
house  and  lineage  of  Popery  ;"  p.  15 — 
"  not  only  Romanism  in  its  essence, 
but  will  become  Romanism  in  full  man- 
ifestation." p  18.  et  passim. 

"  With  great  truth,  I  can  say  that  I 
have  diligently  studied  the  system." 
p.  14. 


"  A  more  singular  pretence  was 
never  conceived,  than  that  such  repre- 
sentations of  Christian  truth  are  capa- 
ble of  being  squeezed  into  any  thing 
but  a  perfect  contradiction  of  the  plain- 
est and  most  repealed  declarations  of 
our  own  Church."  p.  343. 


1  The  worthy  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  o/*N.  J.  seems  to  think  that  almost  all 
the  abominations  of  Romanism  [how  very  "  inconvenient  "  to  kiss  the  foot  of  an 
Italian  ecclesiastic]  may  be  condensed  into  that  one  frightful  word — POPE  ! 
But  there  can  be  a  great  deal  of  "  pretty  Popery  "  without  having  a  Chief  Bi- 
shop at  Rome.  Although  the  Pope  raised  himself  above  the  Bishops,  just  as 
the  Bishops  did  above  the  Presbyters,  it  is  very  possible  for  the  three  to  hold  oven 
worse  errors  in  common.  The  reader  will  find,  as  he  goes  along,  that  this 
"  Pretty  Popery  "  has  a  very  strong  resemblance  to  her  less  comely  twin-brother 

at  Rome. "  Popery  without  'a  Pope  !"     Yes ;  "  mutato  nomine  " — the  name 

being  changed,  there  is  no  scarcity. 

The  following  quotation  from  Rev.  Mr.  Palmer  (whose  work  on  "the  Church" 
Bishop  Whitiingham  has  edited  in  this  country,  and  the  notes  in  which  indicate 
that  the  Bishop  is  even  higher  Church  than  the  Deacon,  a  thing  not  uncom- 
mon) will  show  that  some,  engaged  in  the  Oxford  "  movement "  have  no  objec- 
tion to  kissing  the  Pope,  provided  it  be  in  the  right  place.  Says  Mr.  Palmer 
•'I  should  like  to  see  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  and  our  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  go  barefoot  to  Rome,  and  fall  upon  the  Pope's  neck,  and  kiss  him, 
and  never  let  him  go  till  they  had  persuaded  him  to  be  reasonable."  After  such 
long  and  "  Catholic"  salutations,  it  is  a  Bupposable  case  that  the  two  divines 
would  have  no  objection  to  the  "bare  foot"  of  the  Pope. 


Bishoi'  M'Ilvaixk. 

"  If  men  have  cried  "  Popery,"  when 
there  was  no  danger,  it  does  not  follow 
that  whenever  the  cry  shall  be  raised 
again,  we  should  remain  at  our  ease. 
Many  groundless  alarms  of  fire  are 
heard  in  our  cities.  Incendiaries 
would  be  glad  to  persuade  us  hence, 
that  all  future  alarms  are  so  likely  to  be 
groundless  that  we  need  not  heed  them. 

So  would  Satan  rejoice  in  his  work, 
and  have  free  course  to  inflame  the  city 
of  God  with  his  fiery  darts,  could  he 
only  persuade  us  that  because  such  men 
as  Hooker  and  Whitgift,  &c,  were 
falsely  accused  of  Popery,  therefore 
we  need  be  under  no  apprehension  of 
Popery  from  the  men  of  Oxford." — 
p.  527. 


Bishop  Doane. 

"  Who  has  not  heard  the  sweeping 
charge  of  Popery  brought,  not  only  a- 
gainst  the  Church  of  which  Hooker 
was  a  Presbyter,  and  its  American  Sis- 
ter, but  against  all  and  singular  their 
doctrines,  rules  and  usages  ?  Did  they 
believe  and  teach  Apostolic  Succes- 
sion ?  It  was  rank  Popery.  Popery 
was  thus  a  matter  of  history. — Did 
they  maintain  Baptismal  Regeneration? 
Still  it  was  Popery.  Then  Popery 
was  a  doctrine.  Do  they  use  a  Litur- 
gy ?  Popery!  Popery  is  a  form  of 
prayer. — Do  they  kneel  at  the  com- 
munion ?  Popery  !  Popery  is  a  pos- 
ture.— Do  they  wear  a  Surplice] 
Popery !  Popery  is  a  garment.  Do 
they  erect  a  Cross  upon  a  Church,  or 
private  dwelling?  Popery!  a  bit  of 
wood  is  Popery."  p.  156.* 

"  This  calumny  of  "  Popery"  has 
been  thrown  upon  the  greatest  lights 

of  the  Church It  was  the  cry  a- 

gainst  Jewell,  Whitgift,  Hooker,"  &c. 
p.  2. 

Both  writers  express  their  opinions  of  the  Popish  tendency  of  Ox- 
fordism,  with  sufficient  decision  and  earnestness.  We  shall  now,  as 
we  proceed  to  view  the  system,  be  able  to  determine  its  true  charac- 
ter, and  to  decide  which  of  the  two  Bishops  is  right.  The  prospect 
now  is  that  "  the  contention  will  be  so  sharp  between  them,  that  they 
will  depart  asunder  one  from  another" — the  one  to  verge  towards 
Rome,  and  the  other  to  pass  on  to  Geneva  and  the  countries  of  the 
Reformation. 

Let  us  attend  first  to  the  doctrine  of  Justification,  which  was 
the  lever  that  upheaved  the  Roman  "  world  of  iniquity." 


"  We  are  not  to  be  put  to  sleep  by 
such  opiates,  nor  blinded  by  such  dust. 
Popery  is  on  the  alert.  Satan  is  about 
his  work."  p.  527. 


"With  great  deference,  we  suggest  that  these  lively  figures  of  speech  be 
converted  into  Presbyterian  language,  and  applied  to  that  "mixed  multitude" 
whom  "  the  Rector  of  St.  Mary's  Church"  considers  as  under  the  "  malign  in- 
fluences of  Calvinism  ?"  Do  they  believe  in  Presbyterian  ordination?  Cal- 
Tinism  !  Calvinism  is  Scripture  history. — Did  they  believe  in  regeneration  by 
the  Spirit?  Still  it  is  Calvinism  !  Calvinism  is  Bible  doctrine. — Do  they  pray 
extempore?  Calvinism!  Calvinism  is  prayer  without  a  Service  Book.  Do 
they  sit  at  the  Communion  table?  Calvinism  !  Calvinism  is  an  Apostolic  pos- 
ture.— Do  they  wear  decent  apparel  ?  Calvinism  !  Calvinism  is  a  fisherman's 
garment. — Do  they  oppose  "man's  feasts  and  fasts  in  God's  Church  ?"  Cal- 
vinism! Calvinism  is  pure  Anti-Popery. — Do  they  hold  fellowship  with  "other 
denominations?"  Calvinism!  "  Catholic  charity"  is  Calvinism.  We  think 
there  is  more  Gospel  in  our  version  than  in  the  episcopal  text.  The  attention 
of  the  reader  is  directed  to  Bishop  M'llvaine's  commentary  on  these  same 
words. 


I.  JusMffcnUou- 

"The  doctrine  of  a  sinner's  justification  in  the  sight  of  God,  is  fundamental. 
....  This  is  a  central  and  a  cardinal  point  in  theoretical  as  well  as  practical  re- 
ligion ;  and  the  degree  of  error  on  other  articles,  may  be  inferred  from  the  de- 
gree of  departure  from  the  truth,  in  regard  to  this.  The  history  of  the  Christian 
Church,  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  confirms  the  statement  now  given.  Was 
any  heretic  ever  known  to  hold  a  sound  doctrine  on  justification!"  Dr.  Alex- 
ander's  Tract  on  Justification,  p.  4. 

Do  the  Diocesans  of  New  Jersey  and  of  Ohio  agree  with  Dr.  Al- 
exander in  this  estimate  of  the  importance  of  the  doctrine  of  Justi- 
fication? Iftheydo.it  will  be  highly  auspicious  of  the  soundness  of 
their  general  theology.     Let  us,  then,  hear  their  opinions. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bisuop  M'Ilvaine. 

"  Men  lay  the  sacred  platform  out  in  "The   doctrine  of  justification   by 

triangles  and  parallelograms,  and  take  faith  was  the  master-principle   of  the 

their  stand  on  this  or  that,  as  taste  or  Reformation  "  l'ref.  p.  5 — "  that  same 

fancy  shall  direct."     Leeds  Sermon,  great  doctrine,  so  mighty  in  the  war  of 

p.  6.  the  Keformation,  so  feared  and  hated 

and  libelled  at   Rome — Justification." 

"  With  one  school,  this  is  the  great  "It  was  in  precise  accordance  with 
doctrine;  that  with  another.  One  is  the  view  of  Hookkr  that  Luther  spake 
extolled  as  fundamental.  Others  dwin-  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  as  '  the 
die  into  non-essentials.  A  single  truth  Article  of  a  standing  or  falling- 
is  set  up  as  the  test  of  a  standing  or  Church;' — that  Calvin  maintained 
falling  Church:  while  integral  por-  that  "  if  this  one  head  were  yielded  safe 
tions  of  the  same  '  faith  once  delivered  and  entire,  it  would  not  pay  the  cost  to 
to  the  saints  '  serve  but  to  breed  sus-  make  any  great  quarrel  about  other 
picions  of  their  advocates;  and  bring  matters  in  controversy  with  Rome.'  In 
on  those  who  dare  not  to  separate  'what  this  prominence  of  justification,  there 
God  has  joined  together,'  the  name  of  was  a  perfect  agreement  among  tho 
bigots  and  formalists."     do,  p.  7.  Protestant  divines,  as  well  of  England, 

as  of  the  Continent."    p.  23. 

The  great  importance  of  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  faith  is 
thus  fully  acknowledged  by  Bishop  M'llvaine,  as  indeed  it  is  through- 
out his  whole  work;1  whilst  the  Diocesan  of  New  Jersey  has  no  idea 
of  setting  up  a  "single  truth,"  particularly  justification  [possibly  the 
apostolic  succession?]  as  "  the  test  of  a  standing  or  falling  Church." 

We  now  proceed  to  inquire  about  the  nature  of  justification. 

<©pfortr  JusUfieatfou,  iffce  Homatr,  fs  SmtcUffcatfon. 

The  true  nature  of  Justification  is  a  fundamental  point  in  the  dis- 
pute with  the  Tractarians,  as  it  was  at  the  Reformation  with  the  Pa- 
pists.    Oxford  and  Rome  unite  in  denying  the  distinction  between 

1  Take  as  another  specimen,  the  following:  "  It  was  Justification  by  faith 
that  went  into  the  temple  of  the  Lord, — after  Romish  corruptions  had  turned  it 
into  a  market-house  of  masses,  indulgences,  relics  and  '  slaves  and  souls  of  men ' 
— and  overturning  the  tables  of  the  money-changers  and  the  shrines  of  images, 
drove  out  '  the  merchants  of  the  earth,'  and  said  '  make  not  my  Father's  house 
a  house  of  merchandize.'  None  of  these  profane  intrusions  into  the  sanctuary 
of  God  can  stand  the  stern  rebuke  of  that  doctrine."     p.  292. 

2 


10 

justification  and  sanctification,  so  carefully  made  by  the  Reformers 
and  all  evangelical  divines.  The  evangelical  view  of  the  nature  of 
justification  is  thus  briefly  stated  by  Dr.  Alexander: 

"The  common,  popular  sense  of  the  word  Justification  is  exactly  the  same 
as  its  scriptural  and  theological  meaning.  When  we  speak  of  a  person  being 
justified,  we  never  think  of  an  internal  change,  but  a  declaration  of  the  condi- 
tion of  that  person  in  relation  to  some  law  or  rule.  The  word  justify  is  uni- 
formly the  opposite  of  the  word  condemn.  When  a  man  is  condemned,  no 
change  is  effected  by  the  act  on  his  moral  character,  but  he  is  declared  to  be  a 
transgressor,  and  obnoxious  to  the  penalty  of  some  law  ;  so  when  a  person  is 
justified,  no  new  moral  qualities  or  dispositions  are  communicated  by  that  act, 
but  he  is  merely  declared  to  be  acquitted  from  every  charge  which  may  have 
been  brought  against  him,  and  to  have  complied  with  the  requisitions  of  the 
law  by  which  his  conduct  is  tried."  p.  6. 

According  to  this  view,  scriptural  justification  implies  no  change 
of  character,  no  infusion  of  personal  holiness,  but  a  change  of  slate, 
a  change  relative  to  the  law, — the  sinner  being  delivered  from  a 
state  of  condemnation  and  declared  through  the  merits  of  Christ,  to 
be  in  a  state  of  justification. 

It  must  be  distinctly  borne  in  mind  that  sanctification,  according 
to  the  evangelical  view,  always  follows  justification.  It  is  distinct 
from  it  in  nature,  although  an  invariable  attendant  upon  it  in  fact. 
Moreover,  this  view  of  justification  imperatively  demands  sanctifica- 
tion, as  its  legitimate  fruit  and  evidence.  Indeed  no  other  view  can 
authoritatively  enjoin  it.  The  distinction  between  the  two  doctrines 
is  the  only  true  basis  from  which  to  enforce  scripturally  their  prac- 
tical operation  upon  the  hearts  of  men.1  Oxford  and  Rome  unite 
in  rejecting  this  distinction. 

1.    Oxfoud,  with   Rome,  confounds  Justification  and  Sancti- 
fication. 

Bisuop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilyaine. 

"  Is   it  easy  to  draw,  in   the  mere         "It  is  a  distinction  which  the  Church 

words  of  inspiration,  the  exact  distinc-     of  Rome  denies ;  and  which  the  Church 

tion  between  justification  and  sanctifi-     of  England,  with  all  the  Churches  of 

cation  V  p.  69.  the  Reformation,   has    most   earnestly 

maintained,  as  fundamental  in  the 
Gospel  plan  of  salvation."  p.  65. 
"The  present  broad  separation  of  "The  whole  of  Oxford  Divinity  is 
justification  and  sanctification,  as  if  founded  upon  a  denial  of  that' distinc- 
they  were  two  gifts,  is  technical  and  tion.  .  .  .  And  this  is  the  key  to  all  the 
unscriptural."  p.  69.  Quoted  by  Hi-  labyrinth  of  Oxfordism,  precisely  vas  it 
shop  Donne.  is  also  to  all  the  sinuosities  of  Roman- 

ism." p.  65. 
"  Is  it  not  possible   that  theological         "The  great  matter  is  to  keep  clear 
statements  on   this  controverted   sub-     the  essential  diflercnce  between  justifi. 


"  i  No  sinner,  since  the  fall,  has  ever  been  justified  without  being  sanctified, 
or  sanctified  without  being  justified.  But  this  does  not  warrant  their  being 
confounded;  any  more  than  we  should  be  warranted  to  call  justice  mercy,  and 
mercy  justice,  as  they  subsist  in  the  divino  nature,  because  the  two  are  never 
found  there  in  separation  from  each  other." — Dn.  Waudlaw. 


11 


Bishop  Doank. 
}ect,  may  become  technical,  beyond  the 
warrant  of  scripture!"  p.  69. 

"  What  is  the  Popish  error  in  re- 
gard to  justification?  Is  it  taught  at 
Oxford."  p.  63. 

"  In  truth,  Scripture  speaks  of  but 
one  gift,  which  it  sometimes  calls  re- 
newal, sometimes  justification,  accord- 
ing as  it  views  it — passing  to  and  fro 
from  one  to  the  oilier,  so  rapidly,  so 
abruptly,  as  to  force  upon  us,  irresisti- 
bly, the  inference,  that  they  are  really 
one."   Quoted,  page  68. 

"Justification  and  sanctification  are 
substantially  the  6ame  thing."  p.  67. 

"This  is  really  and  truly  our  justi- 
fication, not  faith,  not  holiness  (with 
the  Romanist)  not — much  less — a  mere 
imputation  (with  the  Lutheran)  but 
through  God's  mercy  the  very  presence 
of  Christ."  p.  75. 


BlSUOP    M'll.VAlNK. 

cation  and  sanctification  ;  between  the 
lormer  as  a  restoration  to  favor,  the  lat- 
ter to  purity."  p.  62. 

"  The  first  capital  error  of  the  Pa- 
pists is  that  they  confound  justifica- 
tion and  sanctification.  .  .  .  Oxford  Di- 
vinity confounds  justification  and  sanc- 
tification ?"  p.  145. 

"  When  we  ask  the  great  question 
'  What  is  that  righteousness  whereby 
a  Christian  is  justified?'  the  answer 
of  Oxford  Divinity  can  be  nothing 
else  than  that  the  righteousness  of  re- 
newal or  sanctification,  is  that  righte- 
ousness." p,  66. 

"  It  is  the  fundamental  principle  of 
Oxford  divinity  that  justifying  righte- 
ousness ....  is  iden'.ical  with  sanctifi- 
cation— a  righteousness  in  us  and  not 
in  Christ — personal  as  opposed  to  im- 
puted— a  righteousness  infused  and  in- 
herent— and  therefore  our  own  righte- 
ousness as  much  as  our  souls,  our  intel- 
lects, our  affections  are  our  own."  p. 77. 

The  last  quotation  of  Bishop  Doane  develops  in  peculiar  phrase- 
ology the  Oxford  view  of  Justification.  It  is  "a  presence!"  This 
"presence" — if  any  where — is  "  present  "  with  our  thoughts  and 
feelings;  that  is,  it  must  be  ours;  something  in  us  truly  our  own. 
It  is  in  reality  nothing  more  than  sanctification  concealed  under  a 
new  name;  as  is  evident,  and  as  we  shall  further  have  occasion  to 
notice. 

The  Tractarians  themselves  call  this  divine  presence,  or  gift, 
sometimes  justification  and  sometimes  sanctification.  When  pressed 
for  an  explanation  they  do  not  always  like  to  be  "  exact  and  logical." 


"Is  it  the  office  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  be  exact  and  logical  ?  Are  we  not 
rather  taught  in  it  to  choose  the  mean 
between  what  seem  to  be  opposing  pro- 
positions! As  when  St.  Paul  says 
(Rom.  3,28)  'a  man  is  justified  by 
faith;'  and  St.  James  (2,  24)  "by 
works  a  man  is  justified  ?'  "'  p.  69. 


"  One  would  suppose  that  a  coast,  eo 
undefined  would  afford  but  little  guid- 
ance in  keeping  the  middle  -way,  except 
as  when  mariners,  under  fear  of  hidden 
shoals  and  currents  on  an  unseen  shore, 
keep  as  far  away  at  possible,  p.  36. 


1  This  is  extraordinary  language  to  be  used  by  a  theologian.  Justification  by 
a  "  mean"?  And  what  does  this  mean  ?  we  respectfully  ask.  Is  it  that  a  man 
is  justified  partly  by  faith,  and  partly  by  works?  If  so,  it  is  an  "exact  and 
logical  "  contradiction  of  the  1  lib.  Article  of  the  Bishop's  own  Church,  "  on  the 
Justification  of  man,"  which  says:  "we  are  accounted  righteous  before  God, 
only  for  the  merit  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  by  Faith,  and  not  for 

onr  own  works." Or  is  this  "  mean  "  that  which,  according   to   Oxford,  it 

"  not  faith,  not  holiness,"  but  "  the  very  presence  of  Christ  ?"  If  so,  the  lan- 
guage is  equally  contrary  to  the  Articles  and  the  Scriptures,  which  know  nothing 
of  justification   by  a  "  presence,"  or  by  a  "  m*an."     They  arc  very  "  exact"  la 


12 

Bishop  Diiave.  Bishop  M'Ilvaise. 

"In  the  17th  century,  the  theology         "This  Via  Media  (qu.  Via  Appia?) 

of  the  divines  of  ihe  English   Church  may  he  an  old  path,  and  yet  it  may  not 

was   suhstantially    the    same    as    ours  he  so  old  as  that  Via  Striata,  that  nar- 

[Fusey]  i6.     It  was  the  true  Via  Me-  row  way  that  leadeth  Hnto  life,  of  which 

dia."     p.  27.  the  Saviour  spoke,  in  which  one  walks 

"The  Via  Media,  even  Ovid  knew  by  faith,  and  of  which   it  is  written: 

was  safest.     "Medio  ttitissi?)ius  ibis."  '  Few  there  be  that  find  it.'"  p.  105. 
p.  16. 

"  Will  any  one  still  say,  that  on  the  "The   doctrine  of  Oxford    divinity 

subject  of  justification,  Oxford  teaches  and  that  of  Home,  as  to  what  justifica- 

after  Rome  ?"  p.  92.  tion  consists  in,  is  precisely  the  same." 

p.  164. 

It  appears  from  the  preceding  that  Bishop  M'llvaine  has  a  full  con- 
viction of  the  identity  of  Oxford  and  Roman  justification.  Even 
Bishop  Doane  has  to  contend  that  on  this  fundamental  point,  the 
Bible  is  not  very  "exact  and  logical  "[!]  in  order  to  vindicate  the 
Tractarians  for  moving  off  into  the  mist.  And  he  is  obliged  to  re- 
sort to  the  invisible  Via  Media,  as  the  only  refuge  from  the  argu- 
ments of  his  friend,  who  wisely  prefers  the  Via  Stricta  of  Christ  and 
His  Apostles. 

2.  Oxford  Justification,  like  Roman,  is  progressive  ;  or 
in  the  language  of  Bishop  M'llvaine,  "Justification,  according  to  this 
divinity,  is  progressive,  increasing  as  sanctification  increases."  p.  77. 

" First,  justification  and  sanctifica-         "According  to  this  doctrine,  some 

tion  are  substantially  the  same  thing  ;  are  more  justified  than  others;  the  same 

next,  viewed  relatively  to  each  other,  person  at  various  periods  may  be    in 

justification  follows  on  sanctification.  various  stages  of  justification."  p.  88. 
That  we  are  first  renewed  and  then 
and  therefore  accepted — the  doctrine 
which  Luther  strenuously  opposed — 
is  true  in  one  sense,  but  not  in  another; 
— true  in  a  popular  sense,  not  true  in 
an  exact  sense."    Quoted,  p.  67. 

"Justification  is  a  state  into  which  "Dr.  Pusey  expressly  declares  that 
we  are  brought  of  God's  free  mercy  he  and  those  who  bear  him  company, 
alone,  without  works,  but  in  which,  do 'exclude  sanctification  from  having 
having  been  placed,  we  are  to  "  work  any  place  in  our  justification'  Where 
out  our  salvation  with  fear  and  trcm-  the  line  runs,  and  what  it  is,  he  does 
bling  " — a  state  admitting  of  degrees,  not  say.  But  he  does  tell  us  with  sin- 
according  to  the  degree  of  sanctifica-  gular  contradiction,  that  '  the  state  of 
tion."  Pusey,  quoted  by  Doane,  p.  79.  justification  admits  of  degrees  accord- 
ing to  the  degree  of  sanctification.'"1 
p.  94. 


ascribing  justification  to  faith  alone,  and  the  evidence  of  a  living  faith  to  works. 
In  the  passages  quoted  by  Bishop  Doane,  Paul  refers  to  the  former;  and  James 
to  the  latter.  The  "  mean  "  between  the  two,  no  "  logic,"  or  rhetoric,  of  the 
mo«t  profound  Scholasticism  can  ever  analyze,  without  detecting  Popery  in  ele- 
mentary abundance. 

i  Bishop  M'llvaine  aptly  compares  the  Tractarians  to  "  mistified  mariners 
turning  round  and  round."  "  So  much  [he  adds]  for  losing  sight  of  the  true 
cross !  There  is  all  the  difference  in  the  world  between  steering  by  an  object 
on  shore,  and  an  object  in  the  boat"    p.  100. 


13 


The  occasion  of  this  contradiction  is  explained  by  Mr.  Newman's 
language.  "  Justification  (says  ho)  viewed  relatively  to  the  past,  is 
forgiveness  of  sin  ;  for  nothing  more  it  can  be;  [there  is  no  room  for 
progress  here]  but  considered  as  to  the  present  and  future,  it  is  more; 
it  is  renewal,  wrought  in  us  by  the  Spirit  of  Him,  who  washes 
away  its  still  adhering  imperfections,  [now  it  can  make  progress] 
as  well  as  blols  out  what  is  past."  (Doane  p.  70.)  Or  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Dr.  Pusey,  "It  is  a  state  admitting  of  degrees  (although  the 
first  act  did  not.")  In  other  words,  justification  is  progressive,  ex- 
cept at  its  beginning  ! 

3.  It  may  be  objected  against  our  view  of  Oxford  justification  which 
confounds  it  with  sanctification,  that  the  Oxfordists  make  distinc- 
tions which  separate  their  tertium  quid  from  the  errors  of  Popery. 
Let  us  then  attend  to  this  line  of  separation.  In  the  language  of 
Bishop  M'llvaine,  "  Can  it  be  expected  that  such  a  point  of  resem- 
blance between  them  and  Rome  could  be  given  up,  without  at  least 
an  attempt  at  some  different  showing  V  p.  92. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaive. 

Dr.Pusey  say s  "Justification,  though  "  Of  course  Dr.  Pusey  denies  it,  and 
productive  of  renewal,  is  distinct  from  attempts  to  make  such  distinctions  be- 
it  in  idea."  p.  65.  tween  their  indwelling  righteousness 

and  what  in  all  theology  is  called  sanc- 
tification, as  will  enable  them  to  hold 
to  the  former,  without  feeling  convicted 
of  going  back  to  Rome."  p.  93. 

"This  laborious  distinction  is  un- 
scriptural,  unreal,  mystical ;  in  so  seri- 
ous a  matter,  it  is  mere  trifling,  and  to 
all  pretence  of  sober,  biblical  theology, 
disgraceful.  It  speaks  for  itself.  Sha- 
dowy as  it  is,  however,  and  vain,  it 
shows  to  what  straits  these  divines  are 
driven,  if  they  would  even  seem  to 
keep  clear  of  the  downright  charge  of 
Popery."  p.  97. 

"  13y  the  very  using  of  this  attempt- 
ed distinction  (which  is  no  other  than 


"This  justifying  principle,  though 
•within  us — as  it  must  be,  if  it  is  to 
separate  us  from  the  world — yet  is  not 
of  us,  or  in  us,  not  any  quality  or  act 
of  our  minds,  not  faith,  not  renovation, 
not  obedience,  not  any  thing  cogniza- 
ble by  man,  but  a  certain  divine  gift  in 
which  all  these  qualifications  are  in- 
cluded."1    Quoted  by  Doane,  p.  66. 

"  Neither  the  imputed  righteousness 
of  Christ,  nor  inherent  righteousness  is 


that  in  which  a  justified  state  consists  ;     an  old  device  of  scholastic  Romanism) 


but  the  actual  presence  in  a  mysterious 
way,  or  indwelling  in  the  soul,  through 
the  Spirit,  of  the  Word  incarnate,  in 
whom  is  the  Father."  Quoted  by 
Doane,  p.  89. 

"  Our  justification,  or  our  being  ac- 
counted  righteous  by  Almighty   God, 


their  doctrine  is  identified  with  that  of 
Popery.  When  sick  men  begin  to 
pick  at  the  air,  it  is  a  mournful  evi- 
dence that  sight  is  failing,  and  that  the 
darkness  of  death  is  at  hand."  p.  97. 
"  In  Hooker's  view  no  righteousness 
can    be  within  us,  whether  called  '  the 


consists  in  our  being  grafted  into  the     presence  of  God    by   His  Spirit,'  or 


1  Oxford  Justification  is  a  very  marvellous  quod  libel.     It  is   within  us.  but 
not  in  us — it  is  not  one  thing,  not  another  thing,  not  any  thing,  but  something 

that  includes  all  things  ! The  reader,  by  this  time,  will   perhaps  agree  with 

Bishop  Doane,  that  Oxford  writers  arc  not  very  "exact  and  logical."  The 
days  of  scholastic  puzzles  have  returned  ;  and  it  is  high  time  time  to  restore 
St.  Duns  Scotus  and  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  to  the  calendar.  Bishop  M'llvaine 
says  that  "Thomas  Aquinas  is  an  Oxford  man."  p.  223. 


14 


Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

'  a  divine  glory,' or  ■  gift,'  or  'Sheki- 
nah,"  without  being  inherent  in  the 
same  sense  in  which  our  souls  are  in- 
herent ;  or  without  being  our  own  in 
the  same  sense  in  which  our  souls  are 
our  own." — p.  168. 


Bishop  Doane. 
body,  or  made  members  of  Christ,  in 
God  dwelling  in  us,  and  our  dwelling 
in  God,  and  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the 
gracious  agent  in  this  wonderful  work 
— all  this  has  been  argued  from  Scrip- 
ture in  various  ways."  Quoted  by 
JDoane,  p.  72. 

The  language  of  Hooker  represents  in  its  true  light,  the  vain 
effort  of  Oxford  to  escape  from  Popery.  Bishop  M'llvaine  shows, 
in  one  of  the  ablest  chapters  of  his  work,  that  this  distinction  of  Ox- 
ford (whatever  it  be)  dates  from  the  schoolmen,  and  was  never  con- 
sidered a  departure  from  the  Romish  doctrine,  being  merely  the  trans- 
lation of  a   quiddity  into  an  unknown  tongue.1 

4.  No  one  who  reads  Bishop  M'llvaine's  work,  can  resist  the  evi- 
dence, that  Oxford,  like  Rome,  places  our  justifying  righteousness 
in  ourselves  and  not  in  Christ. 


Dr.  Pusey  says  "the  source  of  our 
acceptance  is  our  union  with  Christ ; 
and  the  Father  looks  on  us  as  accepta- 
ble, as  being  in  Him."  p.  72- 

"  Can  there  be  more  explicit  refer- 
ence of  all  to  God  1  of  all  to  grace? 
How  cleaily  is  it  taught  that  all  we 
are,  or  have,  that  ventures  to  present 
itself  before  the  Holy  One,  is  not  only 
through,  by,  and  of,  but — more  endear- 
ing far — in  Christ."2  p.  90. 


"  There  are  no  passages  in  Oxford 
writings  in  assertion  of  salvation  only 
through  Christ's  merits,  stronger  than 
those  in  the  writings  of  the  leading  di- 
vines of  Home."  p.  165. 

"  Let  them  say  that  they  attribute 
all  to  the  merits  of  Christ  and  nothing 
to  their  own  workings  or  devisings;  it 
is  nothing  more  than  Romish  writers 
have  often  done;  nothing  more  than 
the  Council  of  Trent  has  done."  p. 
170. 


In   the  words  of  Bishop   M'llvaine,  "  Like  Rome,  the  Oxford  di- 
vines ascribe  the  ma-itorious  catise  of  justification  only  to  Christ; 


1  Bishop  M'llvaine  remarks:  "  this  distinction,  instead  of  being  a  dissent  from 
Romanism,  is  of  Romish  origin.  Mr.  Newman  himself  assures  us  that  it  was 
a  subject  of  debate  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  was  left  undecided,  and  is 
therefore  perfectly  consistent  with  its  established  creed."  p.  158. 

2  Mr.  Newman,  in  his  "Lectures  on  Justification,"  calls  the  righteousness  of 
Christ,  imputed  to  us  for  justification,  "  an  unreal  righteousness  and  a  real  cor- 
ruption," "  bringing  us  into  bondage  to  shadows ;" — "  another  gospel."  In  re- 
gard to  these  mystical   Lectures,  there  is  some  difference  of  opinion  : 

"  Mr.  Newman's  Lectures  on  Justi-  "Oh  this  sad,  misty  divinity,  far  too 
Jication  is    a   book,  which  would  en-     scholastic  for  the  pulpit,  far  too  vague 


and  unphilosopbic  for  the  study."  Bi- 
shop M'llvaine,  p.  97. 


gage  and  well  reward  the  careful  study 
of  such  minds,  so  trained,  as  Horace 
Binney's,  John  Sergeant's,  George  E. 
Badger's,  and  David  B.  Ogden's,"  Bi- 
shop Doane,  p.  159. 

It  may  be  well  to  mention  here  that  Oxford  has  taken  the  Platonic  philoso- 
phy under  its  special  patronage.  According  to  Bishop  M'llvaine,  "  Platonism 
and  the  Middle  Ages  are  quite  hobbies  in  the  Oxford  school.  Mr.  Newman 
cannot  account  for  "  the  close  parallelism  "  between  the  Republic  of  Plato  and 
the  Church,  without  adverting  to  the  idea  of  a  "  species  of  inspiration  from  the 
same  Being  who  formed  the  Church!"  Much  of  the  mysticism  of  the  Oxford 
Rohool  may  be  accounted  for  by  its  love  of  Plato.  Enthusiasm,  mysticism,  and 
fanaticism  have  been  the  extravagancies  of  Platonism." 


15 

the  efficient  to  the  Holy  Spirit;  the  instrumental  to  Baptism;  and 
the  formal  (constituent  or  essential)  cause  only  to  a  righteousness 
in  us."  p.  170.  "The  merits  of  Christ  are  applied  to  the  sinner, 
according  to  this  new  v.  ay,  without  any  knowledge  or  application 
on  his  part,  except  as  he  comes  to  the  sacraments  or  uses  other 
4  sacred  symbols'  and  '  effectual  signs  of  grace.'  And  this  applica- 
tion consists  in  the  communication  of  inherent  righteousness  ;  so 
that  we  are  justified,  not  by  the  merits  of  Christ,  but  by  an  inherent 
righteousness  of  our  own,  which  is  given  for  his  sake."  p.  85. 

5.  The  reader  may  now  perhaps  ask,  where  is  the  great  danger  in 
adopting  the  Oxford  view?  Why  is  this  distinction  (which  Oxford 
and  Rome  reject)  between  justification  and  sanctification,  be- 
tween the  justifying  righteousness  of  Christ  and  inherent  righteous- 
ness, so  strongly  and  yerseveringly  vrged  by  all  evangelical  Pro- 
testants? The  following  extracts  from  Bishop  M'llvaine's  work  will 
assist  in  throwing  light  upon  this  important  subject: 

"Now  the  moment  a  system  of  religion  gets  thus  to  rest  in  works  for  justifi- 
cation before  God,  its  strong  tendency,  unless  fortuitously  directed  otherwise,  is 
to  run  to  reliance  on  external  works,  because  they  are  tangible,  appreciable; 
they  can  be  counted  and  distinctly  grasped  for  refuge,  while  internal  holiness 
is  just  the  reverse.  Hence,  while  all  corrupt  systems  of  Christianity,  have 
talked  much  of  inherent  righteousness,  inward  holiness,  <fcc,  their  real  working 
in  the  long  run  has  been  most  grossly  to  neglect  the  inward  work  of  religion, 
and  make  the  whole  business  of  salvation  consist  in  external  observances ;  and 
the  more  they  have  resulted  in  this,  the  more  has  the  outward  show  of  devotion 
increased,  and  the  power  and  efficacy  of  external  symbols  and  gestures  been 
magnified.  All  this  is  natural.  We  could  make  the  whole  aspect  of  our  con- 
gregations at  once  as  devout  and  prostrate  in  the  dust,  as  that  of  a  Romish  Mo- 
nastery, or  a  Mohammedan  Mosque,  or  a  Hindoo  temple,  were  we  only  to  make 
them  thoroughly  believe,  as  Papists,  Mohammedans  and  Hindoos,  that  by  our 
works  we  are  making  ourselves  acceptable.  But  what,  in  such  an  experiment,  we 
should  gain  in  outward  exhibitions  of  devotion,  we  should  lose  in  that  inward 
holiness,  without  which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord."  p.  212. 

"Since  the  age  that  was  distinguished  by  the  bringing  in  of  this  doctrine  of 
inherent  righteousness  for  Justification,  was  also  so  remarkable  for  the  intro- 
duction of  all  the  other  chief  corruptions  of  Romanism,  such  as  image  worship, 
transubstantiation,  purgatory,  indulgences,  &c;  and  since  the  very  men,  who 
were  foremost  in  the  former,  were  also  eminently  distinguished  as  patrons  of  the 
latter,  as  Aquinas  and  Bonoventura  (the  latter  the  chief  devotee  of  the  Virgin 
Mary)  what  are  we  to  anticipate  from  the  introduction  of  precisely  the  same 
doctrine  of  Justification  among  Protestants  1  Is  its  natural  strength  abated  ! 
Call  it  by  a  Protestant,  or  a  Romish  name,  set  it  up  at  Oxford  or  at  Trent,  is  it 
not  the  same; — the  old  righteousness  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  and  as  able 
as  ever,  to  lead  men  to  go  about  '  establishing  their  own  righteousness,  not  sub- 
mitting themselves  to  the  righteousness  of  God  '!  This  tendency  seems  lo  be 
at  present  quite  as  strong  and  active,  and  is  doing  its  work  quite  as  fast,  consid- 
ering the  differences  of  age  and  circumstances,  as  in  the  days  of  Aquinas." 
p.  131. 

"From  imputed  righteousness  to  inherent,  for  Justification,  is  a  great  step; 
but  once  accomplished,  it  makes  many  others  easy.  It  would  be  a  wonderful 
leap  to  cross  at  once,  from  imputed  righteousness  to  Purgatory;  but  the  middle 
ground  of  inherent,  once  gained,  the  rest  is  soon  accomplished.  From  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  imputed  to  me  to  the  righteousness  of  saints  imputed 
to  me,  is  indeed  a  great  gulf,  which  no  leap  of  reforming  agility  could  cross  at 
a  bound  ;  but  the  half-way  position  of  man's  righteousness,  for  justification, 
takes  half  the  difficulty  away,  so  that  under  a  sense  of  one's  need  of  some  bet- 


16 

ter  righteousness  than  his  own,  the  leap  of  the  sinner  is  easy  into  the  midst  of 
the  righteousness  of  All  Saints,'  living  and  dead,  deposited  under  the  keys  of 
St.  Peter,  for  the  convenience  of  the  Church,  and  the  benefit  of  the  system  of 
indulgences."     p.  105. 

"  If  men  work  more  and  more  (according  to  Rome)  grace  doth  more  increase, 
and  they  are  more  and  more  justified.  To  such  as  diminish  it  by  venial  sins,  it  is 
supplied  by  Holy  water,  Ave  Marias,  crossings,  papal  salutations,  and  such  like  : 
which  serve  for  reparations  of  grace  decayed.  To  such  as  have  lost  it  through 
mortal  sin,  it  is  supplied  through  the  Sacrament  of  Penance:  which  Sacra- 
ment hath  force  to  confer  grace  anew  ....  and  change  the  punishment  eternal 
into  a  temporal  satisfactory  punishment  here,  if  time  do  serve,  if  not,  hereafter 
to  be  endured  ;  except  it  be  lightened  by  masses,  works  of  charity,  pilgrimages, 
fasts,  and  such  like  ;  or  else  shortened  by  pardon  by  term,  or  by  plenary  pardon.1 
....  The  Church  of  Rome,  in  teaching  justification  by  inherent  Grace,  doth, 
pervert  the  truth  of  Christ."  Hooker,  as  quoted  by  Bishop  JY1  'Ilvuine,  pp.  20,  21. 

"A  man  who  can  never  know  whether  his  amount  of  inherent  righteousness 
is  sufficient,  will  always  be  excogitating  some  device  or  other  by  which  God 
may  be  the  more  effectually  propitiated  and  satisfied.  In  such  righteousness, 
there  is  something  that  seems  tangible,  measurable,  appreciable.  A  man  can 
count  his  penances,  measure  his  pilgrimages,  weigh  his  gifts,  and  thus  keep  an 
account  of  his  righteousness.  Sinners  of  various  descriptions  will  resort  to  dif- 
ferent modes  to  establish  such  a  righteousness  ;  the  rich  will  purchase  what  they 
are  not  willing  to  work  out,  by  the  prayers  of  priests  and  the  merits  of  saints, 
and  the  virtue  of  indulgences,  to  save  themselves  the  pains  of  austerities.  Thus 
will  arise  the  monster  of  Supererogatory  Merit,  &c." 

"  It  is  the  Romish  doctrine  of  Justification  [by  inherent  righteousness]  that 
gives  value  to  Indulgences,  need  to  Purgatory,  use  to  the  sacrament  of  Penance, 
motive  to  the  invocation  of  Saints,  credence  to  the  existence  of  the  sacred  trea- 
sury of  Supererogatory  Merit,  that  makes  Auricular  Confession  tolerable,  and  all 
the  vain  inventions  of  meritorious  will-worship  precious.  Next  come  devices 
for  the  defence  of  these  ;  and  hence  the  Romish  doctrine  of  tradition,  and^of  in- 
fallibility, and  of  implicit  faith."     p.  22. 

Such  being  the  natural  consequences  of  Roman  and  Oxford  justifi- 
cation, who  can  embrace,  or  endorse  such  a  system,  and  yet  be  con- 
sidered an  evangelical  theologian? 


II.    JFatth. 

"  Next  to  an  enquiry,"  says  Bishop  M'llvaine,  »  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  righteousness  in  which  the  sinner  is  to  be  justified,  is  the  ques- 
tion, by  what  means  he  is  to  become  possessed  of  that  righteousness. 
The  plain  answer  of  the  Scriptures  is  by  faith."  p.  178 The  Ox- 
ford writers  also  speak  of  faith;  but  they  mean  a  very  different 
thing,  and  assign  to  it  a  very  different  office.  Faith  before  Baptism 
is,  according  to  them,  a  mere  historical  knowledge  and  naked  assent 
— a  condition  of  justification,  but  not  its  instrument.  At  Baptism, 
Faith  is  regenerated  and   made  living;  but  even  then  it  is  not  trust 


1  The  reader  is  requested  to  note  that  the  sale  of  these  indulgences  or  pardons, 
led  to  the  Reformation,  and  was  the  means  under  God,  of  restoring  to  the 
Church  the  Apostolic  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  through  the  imputed 
righteousness  of  Christ. 


17 


in  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  but  is  one  of  the  graces  of  sanctifica- 
tion,  and  as  such,  in  connection  with  the  other  graces,  it  sustains  the 
justification  received  in  Baptism. 

Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 
"  In  truth  what  Hooker  and  the  Ho- 
mily mean  by  the  righteousness  of 
Christ,  made  ours  by  imputation 
through  the  instrumental  agency  of 
faith  alone,  has  no  place  in  Oxford 
divinity."   p.  79. 


Bishop  Doane. 

According  to  Dr.  Pusey,  whom  Bi- 
shop Uoane  freely  quotes,  it  is  wrong 
to  "  consider  faith,  as  the  proper  in- 
strument of  justification  ; faith 

being  but  the  sine  qua  nun,  the  neces- 
sary condition  on  our  parts  of  receiving 
it."  p.  53. 

"  This  is  truly  and  really  our  justi- 
fication, not  faith."  Newman,  quoted 
by  Bishop  Doaue,  p.  75. 

"True  faith  may  be  called  colour- 
less, like  air  or  water;  it  is  but  the  me- 
dium through  which  the  soul  views 
Christ.  The  soul  as  little  really  rests 
upon  it,  and  contemplates  it,  as  the 
eye  can  see  the  air."   do.  p.  75. ' 

"To  think  of  being  justified  by  faith 
is  to  look  from  Christ  and  to  fall  from 
grace."    do.  75. 


"  Christ's  cross  does  not  justify  by 
being  looked  at,  but  by  being  applied; 
not  by  being  gazed  at  in  faith,  but  by 
being  actually  set    up    within  us,2  and 


"  Faith,  before  Baptism,  is  in  this 
divinity,  no  instrument  at  all,  because 
dead."  203.  "  Such,  according  to  this 
system,  was  the  dead  faith  of  Paul, 
the  converted,  before  he  was  baptized; 
of  the  three  thousand,  who  were  con- 
verted at  the  Pentecost,  before  they 
were  baptized  :  of  Cornelius  and  his 
household  and  friends,  although  on  all 
of  them  fell  the  Holy  Ghost.  Still 
their  faith  must  have  been  dead,  unre- 
geuerate,  needing  to  be  converted  by 
Baptism,  because  it  was  faith  before 
baptism  ;  and  so  says  Dr.  Pusey."  p. 
187. 

In  this  divinity,  "  faith,  when  rege- 
nerate and  justified  by  baptism,  is  not 
such  a  trust  in  the  divine  mercy  as 
lays    hold    on    the   righteousness   of 


1  Bishop  Andrews  calls  faith  "the  eye  of  our  hope;"  and  Leighton  "  the  see- 
ing  faculty  of  the  soul;"  but  the  Tractarians  degrade  it  from  all  such  special 
agency  in  salvation,  and  consider  it  as  a  mere  "medium.''  Their  faith  has  lit- 
tle to  do  with  the  living  organ  ;  it  is  much  more  like  the  inanimate  element. 

2  The  Oxford  writers  talk  much  of  "  the  cross  within,"  a  kind  of  phraseology 
with  which  Bishop  Doane  seems  to  sympathize.  For  example,  in  one  of  his 
last  sermons  (at  Troy)  he  says,  "  So  shall  the  Cross  imprint  its  saving  sigiia- 
ture  on  your  hearts  and  lives."  p.  34.  And  again,"  While  he  proclaimed  the 
Cross  as  that  in  which  alone  St.  Paul  might  glory,  he  was  most  careful  to  show, 
that  not  the  Cross  on  which  the  Saviour  died  for  us  -was  sufficient,  but  the 
Cross  on  which  we  die  with  Him."  p.  24.  Exactly  so  does  Mr.  Newman  ex- 
press himself:  "The  Cross  in  which  St.  Paul  gloried  was  not  the  actual  sacri- 
fice on  the  Cross;  but  it  is  that  sacrifice  coming  in  power  to  him  who  has 
faith  in  it,  and  converting  his  body  and  soul  into  a  living  sacrifice.  It  is  the 
Cross  realized,  present,  living  in  him,  sealing  him  sanctifying  him,  afflicting 
him."  Far  differently  docs  Bishop  M'llvaine  express  himself:  "God  grant 
they  may  abundantly  rejoice  in  Christ,  in  spite  of  the  lamentable  substitution 
of  a  crucifxiou  within  them,  as  the  object  to  be  looked  to  for  justification,  in- 
stead of  the  sacrifice  upon  the  cross,  in  which  alone  we  are  permitted  to  glory." 
p.  172.  And  again,  "The  Cross  of  Christ,  lilted  up  or.  high  for  every  soul  to 
be  ever  looking  at,  as  the  single  object  of  his  justifying  faith  and  foundation  of 
his  only  hope,  is  borne  away  from  its  central  position  in  the  grand  panorama 
of  Gospel  truth,  and  baptism  is  set  up  in  its  stead,  having  for  its  symbol  a  name 
of  faith,  and  for  its  virtue  a  cross  within,  Christ  crucified,  only  in  the  sense  of 
self-mortification." — M'llvaine,  p.  521. 

3 


18 

Uisiiop  Doase.  Bisuop  M'Ilvaihe. 

that  not  by  our  own  act,  but  by  God's  Christ,  and  thus  justifies  the  seul  be- 
invisible  grace.  Men  sit,  and  gaze,  fore  God."  p.  196.  "  All  this  is  di- 
and  speak  of  the  great  atonement,  and  rectly  denied  of  faith  in  Oxford  divi- 
think  this  is  appropriating  it.  Men  nity.  "  It  would  seem  (says  Mr.  New- 
say  that  faith  is  an  apprehending  and  man)  that  Luther's  doctrine  now  so 
applying;  faith  cannot  really  apply  popular,  that  justifying  faith  is  trust, 
it."  Newman,  quoted  by  Doane,  p.  65     comes  first,  justifies  by  itself,  and  then 

gives  birth  to  all  graces,  is  not  tenable; 
such  a  faith  cannot  be,  and  if  it  could, 
■would  not  justify."  p.  198. 

Bishop  M'llvaine  has  a  long  and  able  chapter,  in  which  he  shows 
in  detail  that  Oxford  and  Roman  faith  are  the  same,  and  concludes 
in  the  following  words:  "  Faith  before  baptism,  is,  in  this  divinity, 
no  instrument  at  all,  because  dead.  In  baptism,  it  is  no  instrument 
at  all,  because  not  made  alive  till  baptism  is  completed.  After  bap- 
tism, it  is  an  instrument  of  justification,  only  as  it  sustains  what 
baptism  has  already  effected,1  and  which,  when  lost,  it  cannot  re- 
new. And  even  in  that  instrumentality,  it  is  not  a  sole  instrument, 
but  is  instrumental  only  as  all  other  graces  are  also ;  and  it  is  only 
said  to  be  the  sole  instrument,3  as  a  reward  for  something  peculiar 
to  itself,  which  we  do  not  pretend  to  understand.  Such  is  the  whole 
internal  and  sole  instrumentality  of  that  faith,  which  St-  Paul  speaks 
of  when  he  says :  "Being  justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with 
God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  p.  209. 

It  thus  appears  "  that  justifying  faith,  like  justifying  righteousness 
in  this  system,  is  a  matter  of  works  altogether  ;  that  the  latter  [righte- 
ousness] is  sanctification,  and  the  former  [faith]  is  justifying  only  as 
it  works  by  love  and  other  graces ;  that  is,  as  it  works  by  sanctifi- 
cation." p.  211. — "  Justifying  faith  is  literally  nothing  in  this  system 
but  a  name,  a  pretence  to  something  which  it  is  not."  p.  510. 

"Such  honor,  then,  has  faith  in  Oxford  Divinity" 


in.  Sacraments.   Baptfem. 

"  It  is  notoriously  the  doctrine  of  the  Trent  Decrees,  that  Baptism  is  '-the 
only  instrumental  cuuse  "  of  justification  ;  so  absolutely  necessary  thereto,  that 
without  it,  justification  is  obtained  by  none.  This  is  precisely  the  doctrine, 
and  a  great  distinguishing  doctrine,  of  the  Oxford  School.  .  .  .  Justification  in 


»  Precisely  in  accordance  with  these  Oxford  views  is  the  language  of  Bishop 
Doane  :  "  His  first  care  was  to  graft  them  in,  by  holy  baptism,  into  the  living 
vine  ;  and  then  to  keep  them  there,  by  grace  through  faith,  unto  salvation." 
Troy  sermon,  p.  25.  Christians  are  first  united  to  Christ  by  baptism,  and  then 
this  union  is  sustained  by  faith  !     Here  is  more  "  pretty  Popery." 

2 "This  symbol,  faith,  [Mr.  Newman  adds]  is  said  to  justify  [the  italics  are 
his]  not  that  it  really  justifies  more  than  other  graces;  but  it  has  this  peculi- 
arity, that  it  signifies  in  its  very  nature,  that  nothing  of  ours  justifies  us ;  or  it 
typifies  the  freeness  of  our  justification.     Faith  heralds  forth  divine  grace,  and 


19 


Baptism,  and  only  there,  is  the  sole  subject  of  a  whole  volume  of  Oxford 
Tracts,  called  "Scriptural  Views  of  Holy  Baptism."  Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  213. 
"  The  reader  is  now  requested  to  observe  that  what  is  called  the  opus  opera- 
tum,  in  the  Romish  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  is  found  in  all  its  offensive 
substance  in  Oxford  Divinity."1  p.  215. 

The  opus  operatum  doctrine  of  Oxfordists  is  proved    by  their 
making  Baptism  the  only  instrument  of  justification. 


Bishop  Doank. 

"Indeed  this  may  be  set  down  as 
the  essence  of  sectarian  doctrine  to 
consider  faith,  and  not  the  sacraments, 
as  the  proper  instrument  of  justifica- 
tion and  other  gospel  gifts;  instead  of 
holding  that  the  grace  of  Christ  comes 
to  us  altogether  from  without  (as  from 
Him,  so  through  the  externals  of  his 
ordaining.")2  Pusey  quoted  by  Doane, 
p.  53. 

"  The  question  is,  whether  the  Ox- 
ford religion  is  a  sacramental  religion 
in  such  sense  as  to  convict  itself  of  Po- 
pery." p.  54. 


"Peter  taught"  (Acts  2.  38,)  with 
Dr.  Pusey,  that  "  by  baptism  an  indi- 
vidual receives  the  forgiveness  of  sin, 
and  a  new  nature,  and  is  made  a  real 
child  of  God,  and  a  real  member  of 
Christ." — "It  is  what  Paul  constantly 
taught,  (Titus  3:  5.— Gal.  3:  27.— 
I  Cor.  12:  13.)  Nay,  it  is  the  very 
teaching  of  our  blessed  Lord  himself." 
(John  3:  5.— Mark  16:  16.)  p.  79, 
80. 

"  So  it  was  understood  by  Archbish- 
op Cranmer."  p.  80. 


Bishop  M'Iltaine. 
"  Without  a  doubt,  Baptism  is  con- 
sidered, in  Oxford  divinity,  as  effica- 
cious to  justification  in  the  adult  re- 
cipient, without  any  faith  except  such 
as  Devils  may  have,  as  well  as  we.  He 
is  made  righteous  by  baptism,  from  be- 
ing, up  to  the  time  of  baptism,  un~ 
righteous."  p-  217. 


"  A  living  faith,  working  by  love,  is 
begotten  in  baptism,  and  is  expressly 
said  not  to  precede,  but  to  follow  it. 
Further  evidence  cannot  be  needed 
than  this,  that  in  the  opus  operatum  of 
Baptism  the  two  schemes  of  Rome 
and  Oxford  are  one."  p.  217. 

"Nothing  could  more  plainly  or 
more  impressively  display  the  "  great 
gulf  fixed"  between  this  Divinity  and 
that  of  the  Scriptures,  than  simply 
this — that  while  the  evidence  of  justi- 
fication which  the  Scriptures  refer  to 
continually  is  that  of  faith,  and  never 
to  our  having  been  baptized ;  on  the 
contrary,  the  evidence  of  Oxfordism, 
like  that  of  Romanism,  is  simply  and 
exclusively  our  baptism."  p.  389. 

"  Now  if  Cranmer  did  hold  literally 
and  strictly,  that  justification  cannot 
take  place  until  we  are  baptized,  how 
is  it  that  he  writes  the  Homily  on  Jus- 


its  name  is  a  sort  of  representative  of  it,  as  opposed  to  works.  Hence  it  may 
well  be  honored  above  the  other  graces,  and  placed  nearer  Christ  than  the  rest, 
as  if  it  -were  distinct  from  them,  and  before  them,  though  it  be  not.  It  is  suit- 
ably said  to  justify  us,  because  it  says  itself,  that  it  does  not— so  to  speak,  as 
a  6ort  of  reward  to  it."  p.  205. 

'  The  opus  operatum  doctrine  is,  that  the  sacraments  are  efficacious  as  in- 
struments of  salvation,  without  regard  to  the  preparation  of  the  recipient. 
Thus,  Tract  32  says  "the  gifts  of  grace  are  deposited  in  mere  positive  ordi- 
nances, as  if  to  warn  us  against  dropping  the  ceremonial  of  Christianity  !" 

2  If  the  Oxford  view  be  the  true  one,  what  is  to  become  of  the  members  of  the 
Societt  of  Fuiends,  who  do  not  use  the  sacraments'!  Tract  No.  41,  speak- 
ing of  the  Quakers,  says  a  churchman  "  must  consider  such  persons  to  be  mere 
heathens,  except  in  knowledge.'"  This  is  a  precious  illustration  of  "  Catholic 
charity." 


20 


Bishop  Doawb. 


"  So   it   was  understood  by    Bishop 
Hooper."  p.  83. 


"So  it  was  understood  Ly    Bishop 
Jewell."  p.  84. 


"Such  is  the  teaching  of  the  Homi- 
lies." p.  85. 

"  Such  is  the  teaching  of  the  Arti- 
cles." p.  86. 


Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 
lification — and  yet  baptism,  as  having 
any  such  relation,  is  not  hinted  all" 
p.  378. 

"  Bishop  Hooper  writes  a  sermon  on 
justification,  in  which  he  speaks  freely 
and  very  strongly  of  faith  as  the  only 
mean  of  justification.  In  this  sermon, 
the  good  Bishop  gets  so  near  to  bap- 
tism as  to  speak  of  Nicodemus  (whose 
case  is  associated  with  baptismal  rege- 
neration) and  yet  not  a  word  about 
baptism  occurs  in  the  whole  sermon." 
p.  379. 

"According  to  Jewell,  the  Church 
has  always  held  a  baptism  of  the  Spi- 
rit, independently  of  the  outward  sac- 
rament of  baptism  by  water."  p.  386. 

"  In  the  Homilies,  Justification  is 
expressly  limited  to  faith,  as  its  only 
instrument  of  reception,  p.  374. 

"The  Article  of  Justification  con- 
tains not  a  -word  about  baptism.  The 
only  instrument  it  knows  in  faith."  p. 
372. 

"  In  the  Catechism  it  is  never  hint- 
ed that  justification  is  limited  to  bap- 
tism, as  its  only  instrument."  p.  374. 

"  We  positively  assert  that  it  is  the 
doctrine  of  our  church,  that  whenever 
a  sinner  repents  and  believes  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  before  baptism,  at 
baptism,  or  after  baptism,  his  sins  are 
perfectly  and  freely  remitted,  he  is  free- 
ly and  completely  justified,  through 
the  righteousness  of  God  by  faith."  p. 
370. 

"The  opus  operation  has  ever  been 
considered  among  Protestants,  a  dark 
and  deadly  plague-spot  of  Popery.  But 
is  not  this  precisely  the  doctrine  of  Ox- 
ford divinity  as  to  the  efficacy  of  bap- 
tism V  p.  217. 


"  Such  is  the  teaching  of  the  Cate- 
chism." 

§    .  9 

"  It  ia  to  be   feared   that  we  have 

been  over-near  certain  celebrated  Pro- 
testant teachers,  Puritan  and  Latitudi- 
narian,  and  have  suffered  in  conse- 
quence. Hence  we  have  almost  em- 
braced the  doctrine  that  God  conveys 
grace  only  through  the  instrumentali- 
ty of  the  mental  energies,  that  is 
through  faith,  prayer,  active  spiritual 
contemplation,  or  (what  is  called)  com- 
munion with  God,  in  contradistinction 
to  the  primitive  view,  according  to 
which  the  church  and  her  sacraments 
are  the  ordained  and  the  direct  visible 
means  of  conveying  to  the  soul  what 
is  in  itself  supernatural  and  unseen." 
Pusey,  quoted  by  Doane,  p.  53. 

This  High  Church  view  of  the  Sacraments,  held  by  Dr.  Pusey 
and  his  confederates  is  justly  characterized  by  Bishop  M'llvnineas  a 
"  dark  and  deadly  plague-spot."  Bishop  Burnet,  on  the  39  Articles, 
also  maintains  "  we  have  just  reason  to  detest  it  as  one  of  the  depths 
of  Satan  ;"  and  "  that  it  looks  more  like  the  incantations  of  Hea- 
thenism than  the  purity  and  simplicity  of  the  Christian  religion." 

Another  evidence  of  the  opus  operatum  doctrine  at  Baptism,  ap- 
pears in  the  entire  DIFFERENCE  made  by  Oxfordism  and  Roman- 
ism BETWEEN  THE  SACRAMENTS  OF  THE  Old  AND  New  TESTA- 
MENTS in  regard  to  saving  efficacy. 


21 


«'  Nothing  is  more  notorious  than  the  fact  that  the  old,  as  well  as  the  mod- 
ern, divines  of  the  Church  of  England,  have  regarded  the  sacraments  of  the 
two  dispensations,  Circumcision  for  example,  as  standing  upon  precisely  the 
same  footing  with  Baptism  in  regard  to  the  spiritual  part  of  the  covenant  seal- 
ed ;  in  other  words  that  the  only  vital  difference  was  in  the  sign;  the  inward, 
spiritual  grace,  being  precisely  the  same  in  both.  .  .  .  But  there  is  great  incon- 
venience in  this  identity  of  circumcision  and  baptism,  to  those  who  hold  the 
latter  to' be  the  only  instrument  of  justification.  Abraham  was  justified,  being 
vncircumcised,  says  Paul.  Consequently,  if  Circumcision  and  Baptism  be  the 
same,  a  sinner  may  be  justified  being  unbaptized.  Hence  results  a  most  in- 
convenient argument  against  baptismal  justification  ;  and  how  is  it  to  be  obvia- 
ted ?  Very  easily.  Our  Oxford  divines  deny  that  Circumcision  and  Baptism 
do  bear  the  spiritual  resemblance  mentioned  above;  and  holding  fast  the  exclu- 
sive instrumentality  of  Baptism,  they  maintain  that  since  the  Old  Testament 
Saints  were  not  baptized,  they  were  not  justified,  but  were  in  bondage,  under 
the  law  and  not  under  grace,  and  received  not  justification,  until  Christ  came, 
and  with  him,  the  grace  and  gift  of  baptism.  To  this  general  rule,  Mr.  Newman 
makes  Abraham  and  Elijah  exceptions."  Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  223,  24. 


Bishop  Doane. 
[Bishop  D.,  after  alluding  to  the  "sa- 
craments" of  the  ark  and  the  rainbow, 
Bays:]     "  Was  not  the  covenant  made 
with  Moses  sacramental  ?     The  rite  of 


Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 
"  The  Flood  and  the  Red  Sea  are, 
by  Dr.  Pusey,  put  on  a  level,  as  ordi- 
nances, with  circumcision,  in  point  of 
grace.   [Just  as  the  ark,  rainbow,  daily 


circumcision  established  as  its  seal;  sacrifice,  &c.  are  by  Dr.  Doane.]  All 
the  Paschal  Lamb,  thai  bleeding  pic-  are  mere  types.  .  .  .  From  this  it  is 
lure  of  *  our  Passover  ;'  the  daily  sac-  manifest  not  only  that  the  sacramental 
rifice,  the  blood  of  atonement,  all  ful-  character  is  denied  to  circumcision, 
filled  and  realized,  when  He  'entered  which  St.  Paul  says  was  'a  sealof  the 
in  once'  'by  his  own  blood;'  'the  righteousness  of faith,  which  Jlbraha?n 
manna,  which  was  spiritual  meat,'  the  had  being  uncircumcised ;'  but  that 
water  in  the  wilderness,  their  'spirit-  all  those  who  lived  before  the  gospel, 
ual  rock.'  .  .  .  Not  that  any  of  these  from  Adam  downwards,  with  some  fa- 
were,  in  the  true  sense,  sacraments  vored  exceptions,  were  without  regene- 
of  SALVATION,  which  the  txuo  sa-  ration,  without  justification,  -without 
craments  of  the  Gospel  are;  but  that  any  promise  or  acceptance  of  Heaven, 
they  were  all  '  figures  of  the  true.' "  and  did  not  receive  any,  till  Christ 
p.  50.  came."1  p.  226. 

•"The  reader  [says  Bishop  M'Ilvaine]  may  very  reasonably  enquire  here 
what,  in  view  of  those  who  thus  think  concerning  the  Old  Testament  Saints, 
did  become  of  their  souls  after  death — did  they  go  to  Heaven  ?  Romish  di- 
vinity answers  Nay — and  reasonably,  because  they  were  not  regenerated  nor 
justified,  since  Christ  had  not  died,  and  Baptism  was  not  given.  Where  then  ! 
To  Limbus  Patrum,  answers  Romanism.  Whether  that  Limbus  is  distinct 
from  that  in  which  infants  that  die  without  Baptism,  are  now  believed  by  the 
Romish  Church  to  be  received,  the  divines  do  doubt,  says  Maldonat.  The  more 
common  opinion,  says  Usher,  is  that  these  be  two  distinct  places, — that  of  the 
Fathers  'now  being  emptied  of  its  inhabitants.'  That  our  Oxford  divines  have 
said  any  thing  directly  on  this  subject,  we  know  not.  But  how  they  can  es- 
cape a  Limbus  Patrum,  substantially  the  same  as  that  set  apart  for  the  accom- 
modation of  the  Romish  doctrine  of  Baptismal  regeneration,  we  cannot  con- 
ceive. ...  As  to  the  multitude  of  Old  Testament  Saints  that  believed — all 
those,  for  instance,  who  are  mentioned  in  Heb.  1 1,  the  '  great  cloud  of  witness- 
es '  who  'all  died  in  faith,'  it  must  follow  that  they  did  not  enter  Heaven. 
But  certainly  they  did  not  go  to  a  place  of  torment.  It  remains  that  they  must 
have  gone  to  some  place  intermediate  between  that  of  the  impenitent,  and  that 
of  the  justified,  waiting  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  from  which  they  were  de- 
livered when  he  had  accomplished  that,  of  which  all  their  religion  had  been,  in 
view  of  this  system,  but  an   inoperative,  inefficacious  shadow."  p  232-234. 


22 

The  Oxford  Tractarians  clearly  teach,  with  the  Romanists,  the 
regeneration  of  the  sinner  by  Water  Baptism.  The  Baptismal  Font 
is  their  gate  of  Heaven.  Bishop  Doane  appears  to  agree  with  them 
fully  in  their  views  of  the  sacraments.  In  what  mode  this  wonder- 
ful efficacy  is  conveyed,  the  Tractarians  have  some  "  reserve"  in  de- 
claring. "Our  Lord  joined  the  two  together — the  high,  mysterious 
and  spiritual  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  with  the  no  less  mysterious 
communication  of  grace  by  water  baptism."  In  the  dispute  at  the 
Council  of  Trent  between  the  Dominicans  and  Franciscans,  whether 
the  sacraments  operated  by  a  grace-conferring  efficacy  that  was  in- 
herent in  the  elements,  or  by  an  efficacy  supernaturally  attached  to 
them  of  God,  the  Oxfordians  would  have  probably  given  the  casting 
vote  in  favor  of  their  brethren  of  St.  Francis; — unless,  indeed,  by 
their  tact  at  distinctions,  they  had  cut  out  a  "  Via  Media,"  which 
passed  straight  up  through  antiquity  to  the  Apostles. 

It  is  evident  that  these  Divines  have  very  mistaken  views  of  the 
nature  of  a  Sacrament.  Baptism,  according  to  the  view  of  Protes- 
tants generally,  is  a  sign,  or  seal,  of  regeneration.  But  Dr.  Pusey 
resolutely  declares  that  "  Baptism  is  not  a  sign  but  the  putting  on  of 
Christ — wherefore  Baptism  is  a  thing  most  powerful  and  effica- 
cious" In  other  words,  Baptism  is  not  the  sign,  but  regeneration 
itself.     This  is  near  enough  to  Rome  ;  but  far  away  from  Scripture! 

The  texts  which  Bishop  Doane  and  others  quote  to  sustain  their  ex- 
travagant views,  will  be  readily  understood  in  a  different  sense,  if  we  re- 
member that  "  the  language  of  the  New  Testament  was  constructed 
with  reference  to  adult  baptism,  which  was  almost  exclusively  wit- 
nessed in  the  first  conversions  to  Christianity;"  and  moreover,  that  the 
persons,  who  became  the  subjects  of  baptism,  were  clearly  understood 
to  profess  a  change  of  heart.  Baptism  was  to  them  "  the  sea  I  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith" — the  covenanted  pledge,  that — if  truly  God's 
children,  as  they  professed  to  be — their  sins  were  forgiven,  and  they 
should  be  made  partakers  of  the  eternal  inheritance.  The  opus 
operatum  hypothesis  is  utterly  irreconcilable  with  Scripture,  and 
tends  to  death  rather  than  to  life. 

With  Bishop  M'llvaine,  we  "conclude  with  a  solemn  caution 
against  such  an  idolatry  of  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  such  a  resting 
on  the  outward  seal,  such  identification  of  the  spiritual  grace  with  the 
invisible  sign,  such  a  losing  of  the  real  nature  of  spiritual  regenera- 
tion in  our  zeal  for  the  honor  of  its  type  and  shadow,  as  is  shown 
in  Oxford  Divinity — to  the  great  peril  of  immortal  souls."  p.  441. 


iv.   scu  after  ttaqptfew.   penance. 

Having  examined  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  Oxfordism  (justifi- 
cation by  inherent  righteousness)  and  seen  its  effects  upon  the  doc- 
trine of  Faith  and  of  the  Sacraments,  "  we  proceed  (says  Bishop 
M'llvaine)  to  further  ramifications; — in  evidence  that  the  tree  of  Ro- 
manism, planted  in  the  classic  soil  of  Oxford,  is  bringing  forth   Ro- 


23 


mish  fruit,  and  is  going  on  to  do  so  more  and  more,  and  may  thus 
be  known  to  be  good  or  evil,  according  as  any  one  may  consider  the 
spreading  shade  of  Popery  to  be  good  or  bad.  Tendinitis  in  La- 
tium."     Bishop  M'llvaine.     p.  237. 

In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  sin  after  baptism  can  only  be  re- 
mitted through  the  "Sacrament  of  Penance."  This  is  consistent 
ground.  Sins  before  baptism  are  remitted,  or  taken  away,  by  the 
infusion  of  grace  at  baptism.  But  sin  after  baptism,  how  shall  that 
be  remitted?  The  true  Protestant  says  "Repent  and  believe  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  No,  says  the  Romanist ;  remission  can  come 
again  only  through  some  Sacrament,  as  it  came  at  first.  But  what 
sacrament?  The  Romish  Church  invents  one,  called  Penance,  com- 
prising contrition,  confession,  satisfaction  and  absolution.  When 
the  Priest  says  "  I  absolve  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father"  &c,  then 
the  sin  after  baptism  is  remitted."     p.  245. 

How  does  Oxfordism  get  along  in  this  emergency? 

Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 


Bishop  Doane. 
"  The  Church  has  no  second  baptism 
to  give,  and  60  she  cannot  pronounce  a 
man  altogether  free  from  his  past  sins. 
There  are  but  two  periods  of  absolute 
cleansing.  Baptism  and  the  day  of 
Judgment."1  Pusey,  quoted  by  Doane. 
p,  95. 

"This  modern  [evangelical]  system, 
which  by  an  artificial,  wrought-up 
peace,  checks  the  deep  and  searching 
agony,  whereby  God,  as  in  a  furnace  of 
fire,  was  purifying  the  whole  man  by 


"Allow  this  darkness  about  the  re- 
mission of  sin  after  baptism,  and  we 
take  leave  of  all  the  consolation  of 
Christ.  Grant  it,  then  welcome  Po- 
pery !  One  thing  or  other — the  Sacra- 
ment of  Penance  for  relief,  or  else  to  be 
all  our  lives  subject  to  bondage,  wait- 
ing for  the  judgment!"     p,  248. 

"  Blessed  be  God,  who  has  spared  us 
such  bondage,  and  showed  us  a  more 
excellent  way,  even  the  'new  and  liv- 
ing way,'  whereby  we  have  '  boldness 
of  access '  to  his  mercy-seat,  and  re- 
the  Spirit  of  Judgment  and  the  Spirit    joice  in  the  certainty  that '  the  blood  of 

Jesus    Christ    cleanseth    us  from  all 
sin.'  "     p,  256. 


of  burning — this  is  altogether  a  spuri- 
ous system."2     do.   p,  94. 

"  This  system"  [the  evangelical, 
which  removes  the  burden  of  sin  by 
"  repentance  and  faith"]  "  is  searing 
men's  consciences  now,  as  much  as 
the  'Indulgences'  of  the  Romish  sys- 
tem did  before."     do.  p.  99. 


"  Hear  what  comfortable  words  our 
Saviour  saith:  '  Come  unto  me,  all  ye 
that  labor  and  are  heavy  laden,  and  / 
will  give  you  rest."     p.  250. 


i  The  Oxford  divines  make  no  provision  for  the  remission  of  sins  after  Bap- 
tism. They  say  "  the  fountain  (of  the  Redeemer's  blood)  has  indeed  been 
opened  for  sin  and  for  uncleanness  ;  but  it  were  to  abuse  the  power  of  the  keys 
entrusted  to  us,  again  to  pretend  to  admit  them  thus;  now  there  remains  only 
the  baptism  of  tears."  On  which  the  (Episcopal)  "Christian  Observer"  re- 
marks: "May  God  forgive  men  who  thus  awfully  presume  to  limit  the  virtue 
of  the  Redeemer's  atonement,  who  substitute  the  penance  of  tears  for  the  blood 
of  Christ." 

*  The  attention  of  the  reader  is  requested  to  the  following,  from  Owen's  works, 
vol.  It,  p.  105.  "The  contest  of  the  Reformers  with  the  Roman  church,  was 
about  the  way  and  means  whereby  the  consciences  of  convinced,  troubled  sin- 
ners might  come  to  rest  and  peace  with  God.  For  at  that  lime,  they  were  no 
otherwise  instructed,  but  that  these  things  were  to  be  obtained,  not  only  by 
works  of  righteousness  which  men  did  themselves,  in  obedience  unto  the  com- 


24 


Bishop  Doane. 

"  Even  while  holding  out  the  most 
solemn  form  of  absolution,  as  a  means 
of  relieving  the  troubled  conscience,  our 
Church  confesses  the  incompleteness 
of  her  own  act."     do.  p.  9G. 

"If  the   Romish  church  had  but  the 
dregs    of  the   system    of  the    ancient 
Church,  stale  and  unprofitable  though     penances — what    he    elsewhere    calls 
they  were,  they  yet   had  something  of     '  the    bitterness    of  the   ancient    med- 


Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 
"  Oh,    calumniated    Church  !    that 
one  of  thine  own  children  and  pastors 
should  teach  such  doctrine  for  thine  !" 
p,  250. 

"Dr.  Pusey's  eye   is   upon   degrees 
and    continuance    of   external    bodily 


the  strength  of  the  bitterness  of  the  an- 
cient medicine  ;  they,  at  least,  testified 
to  a  system,  when  men  made  sacrifices 
for  the  good  of  their  souls,  accused  and 
condemned  themselves  .  .  were  grieved 
and  wearied  ....  turned  to  God  in 
weeping,  fasting  and  praying,  .  .  .  ac- 
knowledged and  confessed  their  offen- 
ces, and  sought  to  bring  forth  worthy 
fruits  of  penance;  and  in  cases  of  no- 
torious sins,  were  put  to  open  penance 
and  punishment  in  this  world,  that 
their  souls  might  be  saved  in  the  day 
of  the  Lord."1     do.  p,  9(J. 

Ox  ford  ism  is  thus  in  full  pursuit  of  Penance.  It  robs  the  Chris- 
tian of  his  "  peace  and  joy  in  believing,"  and  turns  him  out  into  the 
desert  of  Roman  mortifications,  without  a  star  to  guide  him,  from 
Baptism  to  the  Judgment ! 


icine.'  .  .  A  broken  heart,  with  faith 
in  the  blood  of  Christ,  are  not  enough. 
The  grand  question  in  Dr.  Pusey's 
sight,  is  how  much  penance,  as  distinct 
from  repentance,  is  necessary  for  par- 
don ....  The  mind  that  fully  sympa- 
thizes with  such  views,  is  penetrated 
with  the  essential  virus  of  Romanism, 
and  only  needs  an  exciting  cause,  to 
break  out  all  over,  with  a  full  erup- 
tion of  Romanism  in  active  develop- 
ment."    p,  319.  352. 


mands  of  God,  but  also  by  the  strict  observance  of  many  inventions  of  what  they 
called  the  church  ;  with  an  ascription  of  strange  efficacy  unto  the  same  ends, 
unto  missatical  sacrifices,  sacramental  absolutions,  penances,  pilgrimages,  and 
other  the  like  superstitions.  Hereby  they  [the  reformers]  observed  that  the 
consciences  of  men  were  kept  in  perpetual  disquietments,  perplexities,  fears  and 
bondage,  exclusive  of  that  rest,  assurance  and  peace  with  God  through  the  blood 
of  Christ,  which  the  Gospel  proclaims  and  lenders.  And  when  the  leaders  of 
the  people  in  that  [Roman]  church  had  observed  this,  that  indeed  the  ways  and 
means  which  they  proposed  and  presented,  would  never  bring  the  souls  of  men 
to  rest,  nor  give  them  the  least  assurance  of  the  pardon  of  sins,  they  made  it  a 
part  of  their  doctrine,  that  the  belief  of  the  pardon  of  our  own  sins,  and  assu- 
rance of  the  love  of  God  in  Christ,  were  false  and  pernicious.  For  what  should 
they  else  do,  when  they  kveiv  well  enough,  th.it  in  their  -way,  and  by  their  pro- 
positions, they  were  not  to  be  attained?  Hence  the  principal  controversy  in 
this  matter,  which  the  reformed  divines  had  with  those  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
was  this,  whether  there  be  according  unto,  and  by  the  Gospel,  a  state  of  rest  and 
assured  peace  with  God  to  be  attained  in  this  life.  And  having  all  advantages 
imaginable  for  the  proof  hereof,  from  the  very  nature,  use,  and  end  of  the  Gos- 
pel, from  the  grace,  love  and  design  of  God  in  Christ,  from  the  efficacy  of  his 
mediation  in  his  oblation  and  intercession,  they  assigned  these  things  lobe  the 
especial  object  of  justifying  faith,  and  that  faith  itself  to  be  a  fiduciary  trust  in 
the  especial  grace  and  mercy  of  God,  through  the  blood  of  Christ,  as  proposed 
in  the  promises  of  the  Gospel." 

1  The  "  Christian  Observer  "  remarks :  "  The  doctrine  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
though  it  is  in  the  spirit  of"  these  Tracts,  is  less  terrific,  because  it  makes  repent- 
ance a  sacrament;  so  that  an  authorized  avenue  of  'sacramental  grace '  is 
still  afforded  for  the  solace  of  the  trembling  penitent.     The   Tract  doctrine  is 

PllOTI.STANTlSM    11EJECTED  AND   PoPEItY   SPOILED." 


25 
v.  ittoital  cmtt  ©en (a I  &U\b. 

"  It  is  a  well  known  doctrine  of  the  Romish  Church  that  sins  are  divisible 
into  mortal  and  venial.  JMortul  sins  are  those  'which  are  done  willingly  or 
are  of  any  magnitude.  To  these  eternal  punishment  is  due  ;'  and  they  can  be 
remitted  only  through  the  Sacrament  of  Penance.  Venial  tins  are  such  89 
arise  from  mere  *  concupiscence '  and  are  so  light  as  not  to  destroy  grace,  or  to 
deserve  eternal  punishment.  Hence  all  that  is  necessary  to  remit  venial  sin  is 
a  little  Holy  Water,  a  Pater  Noster,  a  Bishop's  blessing,  or  a  knock  on  the 
breast,  &c."  Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  257. 

This  distinction  of  mortal  and  venial  sins  arises  from  the  Roman 
view  of  Baptismal  Regeneration.  In  this  operation,  ("opus  opera- 
turn  ")  the  "  supernatural  grace"  whereby  Adam  was  justified,  and 
which  he  lost  by  mortal  sin,  is  restored  to  the  sinner  in  the  shape  of 
infused  righteousness.  Original  sin,  according  to  this  scheme,  con- 
sists  only  in  the  loss  of  this  "  supernatural  grace  ;"  and  as  this 
grace  is  restored  in  Baptism,  so  also  is  original  sin  removed.  The 
motions  of  the  flesh,  the  remnant  of  the  carnal  man,  are,  there- 
fore, not  properly  of  the  nature  of  sin,  but  are  the  comparatively  harm- 
less impulses  of  "  concupiscence." 

44  The  reader  is  requested  to  consider  wherein  lies  any  substantial 
difference  between  this  doctrine  and  that  of  Dr.  Pusey  and  Mr.  New- 
man." 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaixe. 

"  The  church  has  no  second  baptism  "  Do  the  Oxford  men  mean  that  eve- 
to  give,  and  so  she  cannot  pronounce  ry  man  (for  all  have  sinned  after  bap- 
a  man  altogether  free  from  his  past  tism)  is  beyond  Justification  till  the 
6ins.  There  are  but  two  periods  of  day  of  Judgment]  Incredible!  Cer- 
absolute  cleansing,  baptism  and  the  day  tainlynot!  What  then  1  Why  when 
Judgment."1  Pusey,  quoted  by  Doane,  they  speak  of  sin  after  Baptism,  they 
p.  95.  mean  not  such  sins  as  are  thus  confes- 

sed, l'u t  moutal  sins.  Hence,  such  as 
the  Christian  daily  confesses  are  vk- 
nial  sins."  p.  264* 

It  thus  appears,  says  Bishop  M'llvaine,  "  that,  although  the  sins 
of  the  Christian's  daily  course  are  expressly  called  sins  by  the  Scrip- 
tures, yet  so  little  do  they  seem  to  Dr.  Pusey  to  have  the  "  true  and 
proper  nature  of  sin,"  that  when  he  uses  the  expression  "  Sin  after 
Baptism"  he  does  not  mean  to  include  them  therein,  and  does  not 
think  it  worth  while  to  hint  that  they  exist."  p.  264.  The  Oxford 
men  cannot  help  making  the  distinction  between  "  mortal  and  ve- 
nial"  sins,  inasmuch  as  they  adopt  the  Romish  view  of  Baptismal 
regeneration,  which  takes  away  all  sin,  original  and  actual,  and  by 


'  Dr.  Pusey  has  the  following,  which  is  an  index  to  his  system  :  "  A  ques- 
tion will  probably  occur  to  many,  what  is  the  distinction  between  lesser  and 
greater — venial  and  moiital  sins  7  Or  if  mortal  sins  be  sins  against  the  dec- 
alogue, as  St.  Augustine  says,  are  they  only  the  highest  degree  of  those  sins, 
or  are  they  the  lower  also]  This  question,  as  it  is  a  very  distressing  one,  J 
■would gladly  answer  if  J  could  or  dared  .'" — This  impossibility  of  distinguish- 
ing between  mortal  and  venial  sins  must  be  at  least  as  distressing  to  the  groat 
mass  of  humble  believers,  as  it  is  to  the  more  enlightened  Dr.  Pusey. 
4 


26 

the  infusion  of  inherent  righteousness,  leaves  every  one  to  the  work- 
ings of  "  concupiscence,"  which  is  a  sort  of  defective  innocence. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilyainb. 

"The  reader  will  do  well,  [Bishop  "When  our  16th  Article  speaks  of 

Doane  himself  volunteers  the  remark]  'deadly   sin    after    baptism,'  it   means 

before  he  enters  final  judgment  against  no  such  distinction  between  sins  mor- 

Dr.  Pusey,  to  bear  in  mind  the  terms  of  tal  and  'venial.     'Every  deadly  sin  " 

the   16th  Article:    JVot  every  deadly  in  the  Article  means  'every  sin,  for  ev- 

sin,  willingly  committed  after  baptism  ery  sin  is  deadly.'  "  p.  264. 
is  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  un- 
pardonable." p.  93.  > 

[Bishop  D.rin  reply  to  a  remark  that  [Bishop  M'llvaine  could  not  antici- 

"  all  sin  is  deadly,"  comes  to  the  aid  pate  that  this  text  would  be  brought  for- 

of  his  Oxford  friends,  and  says],  "  and  ward  by  the  Diocesan  of  New  Jersey  to 

yet  St.  John  hath  said    '  If  any  man  sustain  the  Roman  distinction  between 

6ee  his  brother  sin  a  sin  which  is  not  mortal  and  venial  sins  ;  and  so  he  has 

unto  death,  he  shall  ask,  and  he  shall  no   "parallel"  passage.     The  reader, 

give  him  life  for  them  that  sin  not  unto  however,  is  requested  to  look,  at  the 

death.    There  is  a  sin  unto  death  :  I  do  note.2] 
not  say  that  he  shall  pray  for  it."  p.  95. 

In  conclusion,  says  Bishop  M'llvaine,  "it  is  an  immense  matter 
for  the  enquirer  to  settle  in  his  mind,  if  he  would  drink  of  the  con- 
solations of  this  [Oxford]  Divinity,  to  which  class  his  sins  belong. 
If  they  have  all  been  venial — lhatjs,  if  they  have  not  been  mortal, 
then  they  say  to  him,  "  go  in  peace."  p.  512. 

If  his  sins  are  mortal,  he  must  "  do  penance"  till  the  day  of 
Judgment.3 


•It  looks  ominous  for  a  Bishop  of  the  "  Scoto-Anglican  succession  "  to  give  a 
Roman    interpretation  to  an  Article  of  the  "Protestant  Episcopal  Church." 

Bishop  M'llvaine  quotes  the  Bishop  of  Exeter:  "Let  us  beware  of  harden- 
ing our  own  hearts,  and  of  corrupting  the  hearts  of  our  brethren — by  whispering 
to  ourselves  or  them  which  sin  is  more  or  less  deadly  than  others." — p.  265. 

2  This  attempt  of  the  Bishop  of  New  Jersey  to  come  to  the  aid  of  his  "Cath- 
olic" friends,  indicates  that  he  does  not  always  interpret  scripture  according  to 
"  primitive  tradition."  For  this  passage  in  John's  Epistle  is  not  claimed  even 
by  the  Romans  to  support  their  distinction  between  mortal  and  venial  sins! 
"  A  sin  unto  death  is  another  thing  than  a  mortal  sin ;  for  it  is  that  mortal  sin 
only  whereof  a  man  is  never  penitent  before  his  death,  or  in  which  he  continu- 
eth  till  death,  and  dieth  in  it.  So  likewise  "  a  sin  not  unto  death  "  is  not  that 
which  we  call  a  venial  sin,  but  any  that  a  man  committeth,  and  continueth  not 
therein  till  death."  See  Rhenish  Annotations. — Protestants  commonly  interpret 
the  "sin  unto  death"  to  mean  an  apostacy  from  Christianity  connected  with 
blasphemy  against  the  Spirit.  Doddridge  adds  "where  it  was  most  difficult  to 
distinguish,  the  gift  of  discerning  spirits  might  infallibly  decide;  where  it  was 
dubious,  charity  would  incline  to  the  milder  extreme;  and  conditional  prayer 
might  however  be  offered." 

3  John  Rogers,  of  the  Society  of  Friends,  remarks :  "  The  distinction  between 
venial  and  mortal  sin  is  dangerous.  Men  will  be  apt  to  imagine  nearly  all  their 
sins  to  be  venial,  or  nearly  none  to  be  mortal.  Moreover,  men  will  be  liable 
to  fancy  that  there  are  no  great  sins  ;  for  having  deemed  them  venial,  they  will 
quickly  deem  them  small.  Moreover,  men  will  be  too  prone  to  go  on  from  judg- 
ing their  sins  to  be  venial  and  small,  to  judge  them  to  be  few ;  for  if  great  can 
be  squeezed  into  small,  manycan  be  squeezed  into  few.  Venial— small— few." 
Anti-popcry,  p.  240. 


27 


vi.  $urfl«rtorB. 

Romanism  maintains  a  Purgatory,  where  the  souls  of  the  depart- 
ed are  detained  for  fiery  purification.  Their  condition  is  aided  by 
masses,  prayers,  alms,  and  other  works  of  piety,  "  which  believers 
living  perform  for  believers  dead."  "This  (says  Bishop  M'llvaine) 
is  consistent.  The  Oxford  system  must  admit  as  much.  And  here 
follows  the  reason  in  its  own  words:  •■  The  Roman  Church  holds 
that  the  great  majority  of  Christians  die  in  God's  favor,  yet  more  or 
less  under  the  bonds  of  their  sins.  And  so  far  [says  Tract  No.  79] 
we  may  unhesitatingly  allow  to  them,  or  rather  we  ourselves  hold 
the  same,  if  we  hold  that  after  Baptism,  there  is  no  plenary  pardon 
of  sins  in  this  life  to  the  sinner,  however  penitent,  such  as  in  Bap- 
tism, were  once  vouchsafed  to  him,"  Tracts,  vol.  3,  p.  517. — M 'li- 
vable, p.  266. 


Bishop  Doane. 
"  Purgatory — Do  the  Oxford  wri- 
ters teach  it?  To  say,  Yes,  sticks  in 
the  throat.  To  say,  No,  would  be  to 
lose  the  benefit  of  a  most  pregnant 
prejudice.  Hence  such  sentences  '  a- 
bout  it  and  about  it.'"  p.  104. 


"The  Oxford  theory,'  it  is  said, 
•  lacks  but  one  feature  of  Purgatory, 
namely,  suffering  or  discipline' — as  the 
old  lady's  gun  wanted  nothing  to  make 
it  dangerous,  but  a  lock,  a  stock  and  a 
barrel!"  p.  104. 


"  But  wherein  a  man's  penitenoe 
should  consist;  whether  continued  re- 
pentance [or  something  else]  would  ef- 
face the  traces  of  6in  in  himself;  whe- 
ther he  might  [Cj*]  ever  in  this  life 
look  upon  himself  as  restored  to  the 
state  in  which  he  had  been,  bad  he 
not  committed  it ;  whether  it  affect  the 
degree  of  his  future  bliss,  or  its  effects 
be  effaced  by  repentance;  whether  ces- 
sation of  his  active  repentance  [Pen- 
ance] may  not  bring  back  degrees  of 
6in  upon  him  ;  whether  it  shall  appear 
•gain  in  the  day  of  Judgment :  these 


Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

"  The  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent 
determines  '  That  there  is  a  Purgato- 
ry, and  that  souls  there  detained  are 
aided  by  the  suffrages  of  the  living, 
and  above  all  by  the  acceptable  sacri- 
fice of  the  Altar.'  Now  of  this  dire 
Romish  corruption,  do  the  Oxford  wri- 
ters, in  Tract  No.  79  on  Purgatory, 
say  ■  Taken  in  the  mere  letter,  there 
is  little  in  it  against  which  we  shall  be 
able  to  sustain  formal  objections.'  This 
is  consistent.  The  Oxford  system  must 
admit  as  much."  p.  266. 

"  Now  the  only  difference  pretended 
to  between  Oxford  and  Romish  doc- 
trine, is  that  whilst  both  maintain  a 
purgation  from  sin,  or  Purgatory,  in  the 
future  world,  the  Romanist  makes  a 
definite  place  for  it,  and  makes  that 
place  to  be  one  of  pain;  whilst  the 
Oxfonlist  contents  himself  with  say- 
ing that  it  is  a  purification  from  sin, 
not  determining,  but  not  denying,  that 
there  is  pain  in  it,  and  a  place  for  it, 
such  as  Romanists  speak  of."  p.  266. 

"  No  leaning  towards  Purgatory  dis- 
coverable in  these  words  !  If  we  de- 
part this  life  with  sin  not  'entirely  ef- 
faced ;'  if  it  is  to  meet  us  at  the  'day  of 
Judgment,'  then  what  can  be  our 
hope  ?  Nothing  remains  but  the  in- 
lervul  between  death  and  the  Judg- 
ment. Here,  if  any  where  after  death, 
must  the  remaining  traces  of  sin  be 
effaced.  How  1  By  the  efficacy  of 
purgatorial  discipline,  of  course."  p. 
25 1". 

"  Grave  questions  indeed  for  Protes- 
tant divines,  with  the  Articles  and  Ho- 


23 


Bishop  M'Iltaiwr. 

milies  of  the  Church  of  England  and 
ihe  Word  of  God  in  their  hands,  to 
be  divided  about!  Go,  and  learn  the 
alphabet  of  the  Gospel ! 

"  Connecting  all  this  with  what  ha9 
been  shown  under  the  head  of  Sin  af- 
ter Baptism,  one  would  suppose  that 
the  Jiames  of  Purgatory  could  hardly 
be  prevented  from  soon  bursting  out  in 
open  day,  from  the  "  wood,  hay  and 
stubble"  of  Oxfordism,  seeing  it  has 
such  a  preparatory  funeral-pile  of  com- 
bustibles." p.  267. 

[When  a  Bishop  in  a  "Protestant" 
Church  can  quote  such  words  as  these 
and  the  preceding  ones,  quoted  by  Bish- 
op Doane,  without  an  expression  of  his 
indignation,  or  even  of  his  dissent,  but 
rather  his  approbation,  he  ought  to  re- 
member, in  the  spirit  of  "the  bitterness 
of  the  ancient  medicine,"  the  Articles 
of  his  Church,  of  which  the  21st  con- 
tains the  following:  "The  Romish  doc- 
trinex  concerning  purgatory  is  a  fond 
thing,  vainly  invented,  and  grounded 
upon  no  warranty  of  Scripture,  but  ra- 
ther repugnant  to  the  -word  of  God."] 

The  doctrine  of  Purgatory  is  not  only  condemned  by  the  Bible 
and  the  Articles,  but  by  "  primitive  tradition."  Archbishop  Usher 
remarks :  "  For  extinguishing  the  flames  of  Purgatory,  we  need  not 
go  far  to  fetch  water.  And  if  we  need  the  assistance  of  the  ancient 
Fathers,  behold  they  be  here  ready  with  full  buckets  in  their  hands." 
Tout  au  contraire  at  Oxford.  "  When  the  Articles  sound  the  alarm 
to  put  out  the  fire,  these  divines  come  up  to  the  work  with  buckets 
that  "  hold  no  water." 


Bishop  Doaxk. 
and  the  like  are  questions,"  &c.    Pu- 
sey  quoted  by  Doane,  p.  98. 

[Bishop  D.  quotes  as  "calm  words 
and  Christian-like"  the  following  from 
Tract  79.]  "The  pictures  of  Purga- 
tory, the  existence  of  Purgatorial  soci- 
eties, ckc,  afford  a  strange  contrast  to 
the  simple  wording,  and  apparent  in- 
nocence of  the  Decree  (of  Trent)  by 
which  it  is  mado  an  article  of  faith," 
p.  105. 

[Calm,  but  qu.  Christian-like  1] 
Again.  "  If  we  would  consider  Pur- 
gatory as  confined  to  the  mere  opinion, 
that  that  good  which  is  begun  on  earth, 
is  perfected  in  the  next  world,  the  idea 
is  tolerable.  The  word  detentas  (used 
in  the  Decree)  indeed  expresses  a 
stronger  idea  ;  yet  after  all,  hardly  more 
than  that  the  souls  in  Purgatory  would 
be  happier  out  of  it  than  in  it,  and  that 
they  cannot  of  their  own  will  leave  it; 
which  is  not  much  to  grant."  [ !  ! !  ] 
JVeioman,  quoted  by  Doane,  p.  205. 


1  The  Tractarians,  with  the  characteristic  subtlety  of  all  crrorists,  endeavor 
sometimes  to  reconcile  Popery  with  the  39  Articles,  by  making  the  latter  mere- 
ly condemn  Roman  practice  and  not  Roman  doctrine.  This  distinction  cannot 
entirely  avail  them  here,  for  the  Article  expressly  says  "The  Romish  doctrine, 
&c.  is  repugnant  to  the  word  of  God  ;"  and  therefore  Tract  90  reconciles  Pur- 
gatory with  the  Article,  by  maintaining  that  it  condemns  Roman  doctrine,  not 
primitive.     The  primitive,  Apostolic  doctrine  of  Purgatory  ! 

Tract  81  maintains  that  the  sacrifice  offered  by  the  Church  on  earth,  for  the 
whole  Church,  in  the  Eucharist,  obtains  for  those,  who  have  passed  into  the 
unseen  world  additional  joys  and  satisfactions.  This  is  "  ugly  Popery" — 
real  Purgatory. —  Indeed  the  Romanists  differ  from  the  Oxfordists  chiefly  in  ma- 
king Purgatory  a  place  of  so  much  suffering.  The  Oxfordists  admit  that  "  the 
great  majority  die  in  God's  favor,  yet  more  or  less  under  the  bonds  of  their 
sins  ;"  and  that  "  penitents,  from  the  time  of  baptism  up  to  the  day  of  Judg- 
ment, may  be  considered  in  that  double  state,  of  which  Romanists  speak,  their 
persons  accepted,  but  certain  sins  imca?2celted."  If  a  person  is  "  more  or  less 
under  the  bond  of  his  sins,"  and  if  "certain  of  his  sins  are  uncancelled,"  he 
must  be  more  or  less  of  a  sufferer,  n.ore  or  less  under  a  course  of  purgatorial 
discipline. 


29 


vii-  Erasers  for  the  &ca*. 

"  We  have  seen,  thnt  in  the  injunction  of  the  Trent  Decree  con- 
cerning "  sacrifices,  masses,  alms,  and  other  works  of  piety  which 
the  living  are  wont  to  perform  for  dead  believers,"  "  there  is  little  in 
the  letter  "  against  which  the  Oxfordists  think  themselves  "  able  to 
sustain  a  formal  objection." — Bishop  JWllvaine,  p.  268. 

Hence  Mr.  Newman  likens  the  intercession  of  the  Christian  to 
that  of  Christ,  and  calls  it  a  propitiation. 

"  The  Christian  is  plainly  in  his  fitting  place  when  he  intercedes.  He  is 
made  after  the  pattern  of  Christ.     He  is  what    Christ  is.      Christ  intercedes 

above,  and  he  below." Again.     "  Shall  not  prayers  be  both  a  propitiation 

for  the  world  of  sinners,  and  for  his  purchased  Church  V  p.  268. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

1  Dr.  Pusey,  in  Tract  77,  has  shown  "  Oh  no  !  Prayers  for  the  dead,  &c, 


that  the  usage  alluded  to  [prayers  for 
the  dead]  was  not  connected  with  the 
doctrine  of  Purgatory."  p.  107,' 

"  It  has  been  justified  by  such  di- 
vines as  Archbishop  Wake  and  Usher 
and  Bishops  Bull,  Taylor,  and  An- 
drews, to  mention  no  more  names."  p. 
107. 


which  are  already  attained  in  the  race 
of  this  divinity,  must  soon  cross  the 
invisible  line  that  separates  from  Po- 
pish Purgatory."  p.  535. 

"  Nor  do  I  assent  to  their  opinion 
thai  our  Church  does  not  discourage 
prayers  for  the  dead  ; — on  the  contrary, 
I  can  hardly  propose  to  myself  any 
more  decisive  mode  of  discouraging 
the  practice."  p.  269. 

"  I  lament  the  encouragement  given 
by  the  same  writers  to  the  dangerous 
ptactice  of  prayers  for  the  dead."  £x- 
eter  quoted  by  M  'Ilvaine,  p.  268. 


"  If  any,  understanding  in  a  primi- 
tive sense  a  primitive  prayer,  "  most 
humbly  beseeching  thee  to  grant  that 
WO  and  all  thy  -whole  Church  may  ob- 
tain remission  of  our  sins,'  should  thii.k 
that  those  emphatic  words  all  thy -whole 
Church  were  not  restrained  to  the 
Church  militant,  but  included  that  por- 
tion of  the  Church   also  -which   is  at 

rett — WHT  SHOULD  HE  BE  HINDERED?"2 

Pusey  quoted  by  Doane,  p.  111. 

The  reader  will  find  in  Bishop  Doane's  pamphlet,  six  closely 
printed  pages  in  defence  of  prayers  for  the  dead.3  If  it  had  not  been 
for  Bucer  and  Calvin,  par  nobile  fratrum,  the  prayer  for  the  dead 
would  not  have  been  omitted  in  the  revision  of  the  Liturgy.    Under 


1  Prayer  for  the  dead  implies  that  the  happiness  of  the  departed  is  defective, 
and  that  it  may  be  promoted  by  the  intervention  of  others.  Purgatory  needs 
no  better  "hay  and  stubble"  to  build  upon  than  such  vagaries;  and  accord- 
ingly in  practice,  prayers  for  the  dead  and  purgatory  are  harmonious  parts  of  a 
corrupt  system.  The  two  cannot  long  be  separated  even  by  what  Bishop  M'Il- 
vaine denominates  "an  invisible  line." 

1  This  doctrine  of  Oxford,  quoted  by  Bishop  Doane,  goes  much  beyond  Usher. 
The  latter  had  no  idea  that  the  "  faithful  departed  "  needed  "  remission  of  sins." 
He  expre66ly  calls  it  a  "  private  conceit  "  that  "an  augmentation  of  glory  " 
may  be  procured  for  the  dead  by  the  prayers  of  the  living. 

3  What  the  worthy  Bishop's  object  is  in  urging  this  matter,  we  know  not. 
Certain  it  is  that  this  doctrine  is  as  strong  an  "  entering  wedge  "  to  split  in  pieces 
the  6ystem  of  the  39  Articles  as  could  be  well  driven  by  the  Episcopal  staff. — 
Without  Eome  kind  of  Purgatory,  prayer  for  the  dead  is  little  else  than  an  ab- 
surd superstition.     For,  if  the  departed  are  not  in  Purgatory,  but  in  the  enjoy- 


30 

existing  circumstances,  however,  the  Bishop  must  betake  himself  to 
extemporaneous  prayer  [!]  or  else  be  satisfied  with  "  the  admirable 
provisions  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer."  When  Protestants 
want  to  pray  for  the  dead,  is  it  not  a  sad  evidence  of  a  (Roman) 
"Catholic"  partiality  towards  the  theology  of  men,  who,  although 
within  the  pale  of  the  Anglican  Church,  are  "  irreverent  dissenters  " 
from  her  Articles  ? 


vin.   Xntoocatfon  oC  safnts. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilyaine. 

"These  ominous  words,  (invocation  "  The  invocations  to  the  saints  are 
of  saints)  seem  'confirmation  strong'  called  in  a  late  number  of  the  British 
that  these  writers  must  be  far  gone  in  Critic,  by  the  modest  name  of 'unca- 
Popery.  But  it  is  not  half  so  bad  as  tholic  peculiarities.'  p.  270.  '  The 
it  appears."1  p.  114.  seminal   principle  of    Invocation    of 

saints  affords  too  much  ground  for  the 
fear  '  of  further  progress.'  "  p.  533. 

If  prayers  for  the  dead  are  lawful,  then  the  dead  may  of  course 


ment  of  the  pure  happiness  of  the  redeemed,  what  can  be  the  object  of  pray- 
ers in  their  behalf! Scripture  gives  no  support  to  the  doctrine  of  prayers 

for  the  dead.  Solomon,  (a  very  wise  man)  declares  of  the  dead  :  "  Neither 
have  they  any  more  a  portion  forever  in  any  thing  that  is  done  under  the  sun." 
Eccles.  9:  6.  Least  of  all,  do  the  dead  who  are  "  in  Paradise"  and  "present 
•with  the  Lord"  need  a  "  portion "  in  the  prayers  of  imperfect  mortals.  Bishop 
Doane,  ourselves  and  others  have  enough  to  do  with  the  living.  The  dead  are 
beyond  our  sphere.     "  The  field  is  the  ■world,"  not  the  intermediate  state. 

Anne  Hyde,  the  Duchess  of  York,  who  died  a  convert  to  her  husband's  re- 
ligion (Popish)  says:  "I  spoke  severally  to  two  of  the  best  Bishops  we  have 
in  England,  (Dr.  Sheldon,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Dr.  Blanford,  Bishop 
of  Worcester,)  who  both  told  me  there  were  many  things  in  the  Roman  Church 
which  it  were  very  much  to  be  wished  we  had  kept;  as  confession,  which  was, 
no  doubt,  commanded  by  God:  that  prating  for  the  dead  was  one  of 

THE  MOST  ANCIENT  THINGS   IN   ChR  ISTI ANITY  ;     THAT  FOR   THEIR   PARTS  THEY 

did  it  daily,  though  they  wouli)  not  own  it.  [!]  And  afterwards  pressing 
one  of  them  (Dr.  Blanford)  very  much  upon  the  other  points,  he  told  me,  that 
if  he  had  been  bred  a  Catholic  he  would  not  change  his  religion;  but  that  be- 
ing of  another  church,  wherein  he  was  sure,  were  all  things  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, he  thought  it  very  ill  to  give  that  scandal  as  to  leave  that  church  wherein 
he  had  received  his  baptism." — Shuttleivorth  on  tradition,  p.  57. 

1  If  it  be  not  "  half  so  bad  as  it  appears,"  it  is  very  remarkable ;  for  Oxford- 
ism  is  usually  a  great  deal  worse  than  it  wouldt/am  be.  That  it  is  sufficiently 
bad,  however,  appears  from  the  following  "  re-appropriated  "  prayer,  found  in 
Tract  75,  which  contains  "selections  from  the  Roman  Breviary,  prepared  and 
recommended  for  Protestant  use:"  And,  "Therefore  I  beseech  thee,  Blessed 
JWary,  Ever  Virgin,  the  blessed  Michael  Archangel,  the  blessed  John  Baptist, 
the  Holy  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  All  Saints,  and  thee,  my  Father,  to  pray 
the  Lord  our  God  for  me."  See  Christian  Observer,  1838,  p.  745;  where  it 
is  shown  that  such  acts  of  idolatry  are  insidiously  scattered  up  and  down  the 
Breviary  Tract,  No.  75,  which  is  intended  to  "suggest  matter  for  our  private 
devotions."  Of  this  prayer,  the  Oxfordians  say,  "  It  is  not  a  simple  gratuitous 
invocation  made  to  them,  but  it  is  an  Address  to  Almighty  God  in  His  hea- 
venly court,  as  surrounded  by  his  Saints  and  Angels,  answering  to  St.  Paul's 
charge  to  Timothy  'before  God,  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  elect  an- 
gels.' "  Doubtless  these  things  do  not  "appear  half  so  bad"  to  some  as  to  others  ! 


31 

pray  for  themselves  ;  and  if  they  can  pray  for  themselves,  they  can 
pray  for  others  too.  Hence  it  is  practicable  to  obtain  an  interest  in 
their  prayers.  Hence  the  Invocation  of  Saints.  Hence  "  ora  pro 
nobis!" — Mr.  Newman  says  that  the  Invocation  of  Saints  is  a  ques- 
tion which  "the  Articles  left  open'"!  although  the  22d  Article  con- 
demns it  distinctly  and  by  name.  He  also  admits  that  "  the  ora 
pro  nobis  was  not  on  my  showing  necessarily  included  in  that  invo- 
cation of  saints  which  the  Article  condemns."  p.  18.  The  Tracta- 
rians  make  open  doors  or  holes  all  round  the  ramparts  of  the  3f> 
Articles.     Nothing  can  resist  their  "  primitive"  battering-ram. 


ix.   ^icto  Safins'  Bass- 

The  Oxford  men  have  a  strong  desire  to  carry  out  what  they 
call  "  the  spirit  and  the  principle  of  those  inestimable  forms  of  de- 
votion which  are  contained  in  our  authorized  Prayer  Book,"  by 
adding  new  Saints'  days  to  the  English  Calendar.  They  are  not 
satisfied  with  one  "  All  Saints  day,"  but  wish  to  be  more  particu- 
lar in  their  admiration  and  honor. 


Bishop  Duane. 

"  There  is  no  evidence  at  all  that  the 
authors  of  this  system  are  trying  the 
experiment  of  instituting  new  Saints' 
days.  p.  112. 


"  Neither  have  they  set  apart  a  day 
to  the  religious  commemoration  of  Bi- 
shop Ken."  p.  1 12. 

"  Their  sketches  of  services  («  one 
of  them  for  March  21st,  the  day  on 
which  Bishop  Ken  was  taken  from  the 
Church  below ')  are  nothing  more 
than  exercises  in  liturgical  composi- 
tion."1 p.  1 14. 

"  They  are  not  in  imitation  of  the 
Papists ;  since  the  models  on  which 
they  are  formed  are  older  far  than  the 
corruptions  of  the  Church  of  Rome." 
p.  114. 

"  They  aim  not  at  canonising  Bishop 
Ken,  or  in  any  way  intruding  upon  the 
Calendar."  p.  1 14. 


Bishop  M'Ilyaiu'k. 

"  I  cannot  but  deplore  the  rashness, 
which  has  prompted  them  to  recom- 
mend to  private  Christians  the  dedica- 
tion of  particular  days  to  the  Religions 
Commemoration  of  deceased  men." 
Exeter,  quoted  by  JM'Ilvaine,  p.  270. 

"They  have  even  furnished  a  spe- 
cial service  in  honor  of  Bishop  Ken." 
p.  270. 

"  A  more  bare-faced  insult  to  all  de- 
cent consistency  with  the  principles  of 
the  Church  of  England  was  never  per- 
petrated than  the  '  Matin  Service  for 
Bishop  Ken's  day.'  "  p.  271. 

"  The  whole  service,  in  words,  and 
form,  and  parts,  and  arrangement,  and 
every  single  feature,  is  most  studiously 
adjusted  to  the  Roman  Breviary."  p. 
272. 

"  Whence  have  they  authority  to 
canonize  a  6aint!  And  why  should 
they  stop  at  Bishop  Ken  ?  Cannot 
the  principle  be  advantageously  carri- 
ed out  much  further?"  p.  272. 


1  Here  is  another  specimen  of  curious  theological  palliation.  Mere  "  exer- 
cises in  liturgical  composition!"  If  these  men  had  the  revision  of  the  Liturgy, 
how  full  of  these  "  mere  exercises  "  would  it  be!  How  quickly,  too,  would 
the  39  Calvinistic  Articles  (which  are  called  "the  offspring  of  an  uncatholic 
age")  disappear  before  the  black  marks  of  such  Catholic  scribes! 


32 

Bishop  Doawe.  Bishop  M'Iltaine. 

"  How  soon  will  the  memory  of  Mr. 
Froude  be  enshrined  in  a  Matin  ser- 
vice, with   Nocturns   and    Antiphons, 
of  the  Roman  Breviary  1"  p.  275. 
"  Let  Daily  Service,  and  the  keeping  of  holy  daya  be  universal,  (says  the  Bri- 
tish Critic.)     The  Saints  anJ  Angols  will  be  with  us  at  all  events."1 

"  How  is  this  known?  (adds  Bishop   M'llvaine.)     Are  not  these 
writers  developing  their  system  too  fast  for  the  times  ?"  p.  273. 


x.  ^rmisubstautfaiKm. 

V  The  impression  sought  to  be  produced  by  these  Oxford  writers  is 
that  there  is  a  mysterious  presence  of  the  body  of  Christ  in  some 
sense,  which  is  neither  that  of  the  Romanists,  nor  Protestants,  but 
(1  ike  their  doctrine  of  an  inherent  righteousness  '  within,  us,  but  not 
in  us  ')  a  substantial  presence,  but  not  corporeal ;  a  real  presence 
of  his  real  body,  but  not  a  local  presence  ;  not  transubstantiation  ; 
but  the  next  thing  to  it,  and  acknowledging  itself  to  be  a  great  deal 
more  like  transubstantiation,  and  ev'dently  sympathizing  with  it  far 
more  than  with  the  anti-transubstantiation  doctrine  of  Protestants." 
Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  220. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  MTlyaijte. 

"Sensibly    [says  Dr.   Doane]    does  "The  idea  by  which  others  [Protes- 

Dr.  Pusey   write :    '  There  is  a    true,  tants]    explain    the    real  presence   of 

real,  spiritual  (or  rather  the  more  real  Christ,  as  distinguished   from  a  local 

because  spiritual)   presence  of  Christ  presence,  viz  :  that  he  is  really  present, 

at  the  Holy  Supper;  more  real  than  when   he  is  present  effectively,  as  he 

if  we  could,  with  Thomas,  feel   him  was  to   the  woman   who  touched  not 

with  our  hands,  or  thrust  our  hands  in-  Aim  but  his  garment;  while  he  was 

to  his  side  ;    this   is   bestowed   upon  locally  but  not  effectively  present  to 

1  Bishop  Doane  (who  is  already  a  very  strenuous  observer  of  "  man's  feasts 
and  fasts  in  God's  Church  ")  says,  "  It  will  not  be  long,  I  trust,  before  the  Daily 
service,  which  the  Church  designs,  shall  gather  us,  with  grateful  heart*,  within 
the  walls  of  our  sweet  house  of  prayer."  [See  "  little  pastoral"  for  1841,  p. 
2.]  Far  be  it  from  us  to  speak  disrespectfully  of  so  pious  and  Catholic  a  de- 
sign ;  but  we  would  not  dare  to  assert  with  quite  as  much  confidence  as  the 
Tractarians,  that  "  the  saints  and  angels"  would  patronize  an  effort  of  this 
kind  at  all  events.  Such  a  trust,  (to  use  Bishop  M'llvaine's  language)  is  "  too 
fa6t  for  the  times."     Expeuientia  docet. 

The  Oxford  divines  not  only  observe  days,  but  also  "canonical  hours." 
Among  the  instances  of  the  "judicial  humiliation"  of  the  Church  of  England, 
they  reckon  "  the  compression  of  the  seven  canonical  hours  into  our  two  daily 
services,"  which  they  consider  an  admonition  "  that  we,  like  the  Jews,  have 
fallen  back  from  our  privileges,  and  that  if  we  do  not  take  heed  we  shall  forfeit 
the  final  inheritance  also."  Bishop  Doane  is  known  to  have  so  far  risen  up  to 
his  privileges,  as  to  affirm  that  the  canonical  hours  are  "  according  to  ancient 
practice,"  and  also  to  appoint  the  semi-weekly  fast  day  services  at  9  o'clock, 
which  is  one  of  the  canonical  hours.  It  has  been  told  us,  however,  that  this 
canonical  hour  has  been  here  changed,  during  the  winter  season,  to  10  o'clock. 


33 


Hi  shop  Doake, 

faith,  .  .  .  but  it  is  there  inilepertdentlu 
of  faith."  p.  118. 


"The  reverential  suggestion  of  a 
writer  in  the  Tracts,  that  the  unneces- 
sary discussion  of  the  Holy  Eucharist 
should  be  avoided,  as  almost  certain  to 
lead  to  profane  and  rationalistic 
thoughts,  has  seemed  to  authorize  a 
most  unworthy  and  unwarrantable  sus- 
picion." p.  1  18. 

"  That  theirs  is  not  Popish  teaching, 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself  is  wit- 
ness ;   Matt.  2G:  26.  27."  p.  118. 


Disaor  M'Ilvaink. 
the  multitude  that  passed  and  touched 
him,  but  who  derived  no  benefit,  be- 
cause they  had  no  faith  ;  this  is  too 
abstract  and  visionary  for  Oxford."  p. 
219-20. 

"  Connect  with  this,  the  anxiety  of 
these  Oxford  writers  that  the  subject 
should  not  be  discussed.  But  while 
discussion  has  been  discouraged,  ad- 
vancement has  been  made  towards 
transubstantiation." 


"  Behold  to  what  length  the  matter 
has  come    in    the  following    passage, 
from   the   last   British  critic:  "Is  the 
wonder   wrought    at    the  marriage  of 
Cana,  a  miracle,  and  the  change  which 
the  Holy  Elements  undergo,  as  conse- 
crated by  the  Priest,  and  received  by 
the  faithful,  no  miracle,  simply  because 
the  one  was  perceptible  to  the  natural 
eye,  while  the  other  is  discerned  by 
the  spiritual  alone  V  p.  275. 
"  So  much  lias  been  written  (says  Bishop  M'Ilvaine)  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  how  near  this  divinity  approaches  to  the  Romish 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation  in  its  zealous  maintenance  that  there 
is  not  only  a  real  presence  of  Christ  at  the  Eucharist  (in  the  sense 
of  effective  as  distinguished  from  local,  and  through  the  Spirit  and 
not  in  any  substantial  manner,  which   is  the  Protestant  sense)  but 
that  there  is  also  a  "substantial  presence;"1 — "an  immediate,  un- 
seen Presence  of  the  Body,"— that  we  need  not  here  exhibit  the  lan- 
guage of  Oxford  divinity  any  further  on  that  head.     The  tendency, 
at  least,  of  such  views  cannot  be  mistaken."  p.  273. 

Mr.  Newman  thinks  it  "literally  true"  that  "the  consecrated 
bread  is  Christ's  body,"  and  that  there  is  a  real  snperlocal  presence 
in  the  holy  sacrament."  And  Tract  85  asks  "  If  Balaam's  ass  in- 
structed Balaam,  what  is  there  fairly  to  startle  us  in  the  Church's  doc- 
trine,  that  the  water  of  baptism  cleanses  from  sin,  and  that  eating 
the  consecrated  bread  is  eating  his  body."  Bishop  Doane  also  is 
evidently  a  believer  in  this  "substantial"  presence  of  the  body  ot 
Christ  at  the  sacrament.  Me  employs  ten  pages  in  attempting  to 
show  that  the  Oxford  doctrine  is  the  true  one  ;  that  it  is  the  teaching 


1  The  Reformers  never  used  the  term  "substantial,"  which  was  one  of  the 
terms  of  the  Romanists  to  express  their  carnal  presence.  Cranmer  and  the 
early  English  Reformers  carefully  avoided  even  the  use  of  the  term  "  real,"  as 
being  of  Popish  signification.  See  Strype't  Annals,  chop.  3.  Although  more 
modern  evangelical  Protestants  make  use  of  the  term  "  real,"  they  carefully 
guard  against  its  being  considered  as  opposed  to  "spiritual."  The  term  "sub- 
stantial," which  Bishop  M'Ilvaine  quotes  as  Oxfordian,  and  as  implying  some- 
thing "next  to  transubstantiation,"  is  not  of  Protestant  phraseology.  Like 
"snperlocal"  not  local,  it  is  the  exponent  of  Tractarian  mysticism. 


of  the  "  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Apostle  Paul,  the  Liturgy,  the  Cate- 
chism, the  Articles,  the  Homilies,  Cranmer,  Ridley,  Hooker,  the 
Reformed  Dutch  Church,  and  the  Presbyterian  Church!  See  Brief 
Ex.  pp.  115-124.  A  more  unfair,  uncandid  and  unsuccessful  effort, 
it  appears  to  us  was  never  made.  For  example,  the  Article  of  his  own 
Church  says  "The  body  of  Christ  is  given,  taken  and  eaten  in  the 
Supper,  only  after  a  heavenly  and  spiritual  manner."  The  Pres- 
byterian Confession  of  Faith  declares  with  like  emphasis:  "  Worthy 
receivers,  outwardly  partaking  of  the- visible  elements  in  this  sacra- 
ment, do  then  also  inwardly  by  faith,  really  and  indeed,  yet  not 
carnally  and  corporeally,  but  spiritually,  receive  and  feed  upon 
Christ  crucified,  and  ail  the  benefits  of  his  death."  A  stronger 
"  protest"  against  Oxford  substantiation  could  not  be  given  than 
is  given  by  the  English  and  Presbyterian  Churches.  Whether  the 
Oxford  doctrine  be  called  transubstantialion,  consubstantiaticn,  or 
substantiation,  it  is  a  departure  from  the  spiritual  views  of  the  sa- 
crament entertained  by  the  English  and  other  Reformers.  It  is  an 
error,  which  has  a  close  connection  with  the  claims  of  the  High 
Church  Priesthood;1  and  is  derogatory  to  the  simple  and  edifying 
objects  of  the  institution. 

1  The  recent  controversy  in  Baltimore  between  Bishop  Whittingham  and  his 
Presbyter,  Rev.  H.  V.  D.  Johns,  was  in  relation  to  this  very  subject.  The 
Bishop,  who  preached  in  the  morning,  took  the  most  extravagant  views  of  the 
priesthood;  and  Rev.  Mr.  Johns,  who  preached  in  the  same  Church  on  the 
evening  of  the  same  day,  replied  to  his  Bishop,  after  the  scriptural  style.  He 
showed  that  the  Lord's  Supper  was  not  a  sacrifice,  the  Lord's  table  was  i.ot  an 
altar,  and  that  the  Christian  minister  was  not  a  priest,  in  the  sense  of  the  offerer 
of  a  sacrifice.  Ke  has  also  published,  as  an  appendix  to  his  sermon,  a  lecture 
from  the  late  Bishop  White,  sustaining  to  the  uttermost  all  his  positions. 

Bishop  Doane,  on  the  other  hand,  agrees  with  Bishop  Whittingham.  In  his 
last  Conventional  Address,  he  says,  "  I  have  been  pleased  to  observe  the  intro- 
duction iuto  several  Churches  of  the prothesis,  credence,  or  side-tub le,  for  the. 
elements  in  the  Holy  Eucharist,  before  they  are  placed  upon  the  Altar  by  the 
Priest.  Such  an  arrangement,  while  it  makes  the  act  of  offering  distinct  and 
solemn,  is  necessary  to  the  strict  observation  of  the  Rubric."  p.  31.  Now  on 
this  passage,  we  most  respectfully  beg  leave  to  offer  a  few  remaiks.  (1)  Is 
not  the  object  of  these  terms  and  of  this  additional  ceremony,  in  accordance 
with  the  Oxford  view,  to  change  the  supper  into  a  sacrifice?  The  elements 
must  be  first  placed  upon  the  prothesis,  so  that  the  priest  of  the  Apostolic  suc- 
cession may  the  more  solemnly  transfer  a  portion  to  the  altar,  where  the  act  of 
offering  consecrates  and  substantiates  the  sacrifice.  (2)  An  Episcopalian  will 
in  vain  search  his  Frayer-Book  to  find  the  meaning  of  ••  prothesis,  credence  or 
side-table."  lie  must  bring  in  "  tradition  ,-"  and  then  he  will  find  that  this 
appendage  ol  Fopery  was  abolished  at  the  Reformation.  Wheat  ley,  whose  com- 
mentary on  the  Prayer-Book  is  recommended  in  "  the  course  of  ecclesiastical 
■todies  established  by  the  American,  [or  "Scolo-Anglican  "]  House  of  Bishops 
expressly  declares  "  VVk  have  no  sidk  tab  he  authohizkd  bx  ouh  Church." 
If  this  prothesis,  credence  or  side-tuble,  be  so  "  necessary  to  the  strict  observa- 
tion of  the  Rubric,"  it  is  very  remarkable  that  it  was  never  introduced  before, 
and  still  moie  remarkable  that  even  now  it  is  only  introduced  into  "  several 
churches  "  of  the  Apostolical  Diocese  of  New  Jersey  !  (3)  The  word  "*/?//«)•," 
is  equally  foreign  from  the  language  of  the  Prayer-Book  ;  the  term  having  been 
studiously  excluded  by  the  Reformers,  when  they  tore  down  the  Popish  altar, 
and  set  up,  in  its  place,  "  the  Lord's  table."      Wheat  ley  shows  that  the  change 


35 


11  It  is  a  well-known  tenet  of  Romanism  that  the  age  of  miracles 
has  never  ceased;  and  that  miracles  are  a  distinguishing  mark  of  a 
true  Church.  Oxford  Divinity  [says  Bishop  M'llvaine]  is  disposed 
to  claim  thus  much  too."  p,  27G. 


Bishop  Doajje. 

"Is  it  not  true,  that  in  these  days, 
washing  seven  times  in  the  Jordan,  lo 
cure  a  leprosy,  would  be  rejected  as  a 
superstition  ;  or  Peter's  shadow,  or  a 
handkerchief,  or  an  apron  from  Paul's 
body,  to  cure  diseases?  Yet  such 
tilings  have  been.  God's  power  mean- 
while has  not  been  shortened,  but 
man's  faith  ;  and  who  will  say  lhat 
Christianity  or  the  world  has  been  the 
gainer  by  the  change?'1    p,  54. 


Bjshqp  M'Ilvatne. 
"One  of  the  last  tracts  published, 
No.  80,  asks  why  we  should  suppose 
that  with  respect  to  sudJcn  and  extra- 
ordinary cures,  a  broad  line  is  drawn 
between  primitive  and  latter  ages?  On 
which  a  writer  in  the  British  Critic  [a 
Tractarian  journal]  says  'Surely  it  is 
want  of  faith,  which  is  the  only  hin- 
drance to  these  gifts,  in  latter  times.' 
What  is  the  meaning  of  the  popular 
phrase 'the  age  of  miracles'?  Is  not 
every  age  of  the  Church  an  age  of  mir- 
acles?' "     p,  276. 

The  agreement  between  Bishop  Doaneand  the  Tracts  seems  to  be 
both  general  and  particular.  Even  in  regard  to  miracles,  the  Bishop 
thinks  the  only  hindrance  "  in  these  days  "is  the  "  shortening  of 
man's  faith  I"  But  is  there  no  sufficient  faith  in  the  Diocesan  A  '"s<?- 
tolic  Church?  Cannot  an  Apostle  (for  the  worthy  Bishop  fre- 
quently calls  Bishops  Apostles,  and  once  even  Vicars  of  Christ  ! 
Bf.  Ex.  p.  221.)  perform  miracles  among  Churchmen,  who  have 
taken  the  sacraments,  whereby  their  justification  and  faith  are  in- 
creased more  and  more?  Nevertheless,  until  this  power  of  working 
miracles  is  proved  in  the  visible  Apostolic  manner,  we  must  "dis- 
sent" from  these  extraordinary  claims.     Our  faith  is  short. 


took  place  at  the  instance  of  Bishop  Hooper,  who  declared  lhat  "it  would  do 
well  to  turn  Altars  into  Tables,  according  to  the  first  institution  of  Christ;  for 
as  long  as  Altars  remain,  both  the  ignorant  people  and  the  ignorant  and  evil- 
persuaded  priest  will  always  dream  of  Sacrifice"  The  same  thing  appears 
from  one  of  Bishop  Ridley's  injunctions:  "for  that  the  form  of  a  table  may 
more  move  and  turn  the  simple  from  the  old  superstitious  opinions  of  the  popish 
mass,  and  to  the  right  use  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  we  exhort  the  curates,  church- 
wardens, &c,  to  erect  and  set  up  the  Lord's  board,  after  the  form  of  an  honest 
table,  decently  covered."  During  the  reign  of  King  Edward,  the  Lord's  table 
took  the  place  of  the  Popish  altars;  but  when  Roman  Mary  came  to  the  throne 
Altars  again  took  the  place  of  Tables,  and  the  Missal  the  place  of  the  Prayer 
Book.  When  Queen  Elizabeth  became  "Head  of  the  Church,"  Altars  were 
again  removed,  and  Tables  set  up  once  more  in  the  Churches,  upon  the  strong 
representations  and  efforts  ol  the  Reformers.  (S  e  Strype's  Annals,  chap.  12.) 
Since  that  period,  various  High-Church  divines  have  longed  for  the  Altar  again, 
as  we  may  infer  from  their  phraseology.  The  Prayer-Book,  however,  puts  its 
veto  upon  this  "  restoration."  Yet  they  still  adhere  to  the  old  Popish  lan- 
guage; and  persist  in  the  name  of  "Jlltar."  This  unauthorized  innovation 
upon  the  language  of  the  Church  Service,  is  especially  prevalent  during  these 
days  of  Popish  Tractarianism.  Inasmuch  as  the  Prayer-liook  never  uses  the  term 
"Altar,"  but  always  the  term  "  Table,"  why  do  the  lovers  of  the  Prayer-Book 
never  use  "  Table  "  but  always  "Jlltar'?  And  why  do  they  now  begin  to  use 
the  prothesis,  or  "Utile  altar  '—a  phraseology  dishonorable  both  to  Prayer- 
Book  and  Protestantism  ? 


30 

xii.   ^,'treme  eatnctfou. 

"The  British  Critic,1  in  the  Review  of  the  late  Tract,  No.  8(5,  on 
Church  Service,  complains  of  the  author,  '  because  he  did  not  enter 
a  more  decided  protest  than  he  has,  against  the  common  Protestant 
objection  to  Extreme  Unction.'  The  Reviewer  thinks  the  testimony 
of  Scripture,  unexplained  and  unguarded  by  Tradition,  is  in  favor  of  it. 
The  only  reason  against  it  is  that  it  wants  Catholic  consent.  But 
that  [adds  Bishop  M'livaine]  may  be  discovered  before  long  !"  p.  277. 

Bishop  Doane  has  not  advocated  Extreme  Unction,  but  his  views 
of  administering  the  Eucharist  under  certain  very  extreme  circum- 
stances, have  been  supposed  by  many  to  border  on  the  Popish  view. 
Extreme  Unction  can  hardly  claim  higher  power  than  that  implied 
in  the  High  Church  estimate  of  the  Sacraments.  The  Oxford,  High 
Church  party  have  no  need  of  the  additional  sacrament  of  Extreme 
Unction.  They  maintain  that  "Rome  has  not  faith  enough  in  the 
efficacy  of  the  sacraments,  (!!)  and  therefore  has  added  to  their  num- 
ber." It  is  surely  much  simpler  to  take  the  Oxford  plan,  and  add 
to  their  power. 

xin.  sittofntCnfl  at  jjajJtfsm  anS  ftonfirmatfou. 

"The  absence  of  these  in  the  Anglican  Church  [says  Bishop 
M'livaine]  is  called  '■the  loss  of  a  privileged     And  the  keeping  up 

of  the  Coronation  Service  in  which  anointing  is  retained,  is  regarded 
as  an  indication  of 'special  Providential  care  over  the  Church' — 
thus  keeping  up  a  witness  to  both  of  the  Catholic  truths,  of  which 
the  omission  of  anointing  at  Baptism  and  Confirmation  might  seem 
to  betoken  a  disparagement."     p.  278. 

The  Oxford  Tractarians,  or  High  Churchmen,  must  necessarily 
have  a  partiality  for  oils  in  religious  services,  inasmuch  as  these 
oils  were  in  constant  use  in  the  third  and  fourth  centuries,  the  favor- 
ite age  of  Tractarianism.  As  soon  as  the  Anglo-Prussian  scheme 
of  Catholic  Ecclesiastical  Order  shall  go  into  Continental  operation 
(and  it  will  assuredly  also  embrace  a  few  prelates  of  the  Scoto-An- 
gliean  succession  in  these  parts)  what  is  now  called  "  the  loss  of  a 
privilege''''  will  be  most  generously  supplied, according  to  "Catholic 
consent"  and  Roman  usage.     Things  will  go  on  smoothly  then  !3 

1  We  have  heard  that  Bishop  Doane  has  recently  written  a  notice,  expressing 
his  alarm  at  the  British  Critic  for  speaking  so  leniently  of  the  supremacy  of  the 
Pope.  It  will  he  remembered,  however,  that  he  publicly  recommended  this 
same  journal  to  clergymen  and  private  families,  a  year  or  two  after  any  of  the 
extracts,  contained  in  these  pages,  were  written.  We  do  sincerely  hope  that 
a  divine,  of  Bishop  Doane's  extensive  influence,  will  be  led  to  renounce  all  the 
abominable  doctrines  of  that  Tractarian  journal.  If  any  are  alarmed  at  the 
"inconvenient"  doctrine  of  Papal  Supremacy,  there  is  surely  ground  for  alarm 
in  the  pernicious  doctrines  which  gradually  formed  the  system,  over  which  the 
Pope  merely  presides. 

2  Tract  9,  mourning  almost  with  comminution  penitence  over  the  "entire 
omission  of  the  use  of  oil  at  baptism  and  confirmation,"  declares  that  "  no  one 
can  say  the  nrtF.ATXKSs  or  Tin:  bifth  which  are  here  withdrawn;    how  much 


37 


xiv.  increase  of  sacramental  sfflns  anti  efficacious 

SsmtJOls. 

By  these  Tractafian  innovators,  "the  Cross  [says  Bishop  M'll- 
vaine]  is  called  •  a  Sacramental  sign''  and  memorial  (o  the  eyes 
of  the  faithful,  •  a  holy  efficacious  emblem.'  Now  this  is  precisely 
the  distinguishing  description  given  in  our  Article  on  the  Sacraments, 
of  the  Sacramental  character  of  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist.  Thus 
is  the  cross  put  on  a  level,  as  a  sacramental  sign,  with  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  supper."  Bishop  JWllvaine,  p.  278. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaixe. 

"The  half-way  step  to  image-wor- 
ship is  in  the  present  reverence  to  the 
image  of  the  Cross."  p.  533. 

In  "the  .Architectural  description         "  From  similar  restorations  in  doc- 
of  St.   Mary1*    Church,   Burlington,     trine,   it  behoves   the   whole    Church 
N.  J.  occurs  the  following :  "  On  the     most  earnestly  to  pray   "  Good  Lord 
apex    of    the   pediment  is  intended  to     deliver  «s."  p.  56. 
be  fixed  an  acroterium,  bearing  an  en- 
riched Greek  Cross."1  Rector's  offering 
of  '34,  p  47. 

The  new  Church  in  Salem,  N.  J.,  A  Tractarian  writer  says,  "Let  us 
"  is  surmounted,  as  it  should  be,  by  the  multiply  the  same  holy  efficacious  em- 
Cross.  We  honor  the  spirit  which  has  blem  far  and  wide.  There  is  no  say- 
thus  vindicated  the  rightful  use  of  that  ing  how  many  sins  its  awful  form 
most  sacred  emblem  of  our  religion."  might  scare,  how  many  evils  avert." 
Conv.  Add.  1838,  p.  18.  [  !  !  !  ]    quoted  by  Bishop  M'llvaine. 

p.  279. 

Mr.  Newman,  at  Littlemore,  erected  a  Cross,  after  the  Popish  fa- 
shion, over  the  Communion  table,  or  Altar!     "Sicut  a/J/e." 

In  general,  Protestant  Christians,  whilst  they  "glory  in  the  cross," 
do  not,  and  cannot  adopt  the  badges  of  Romanism  and  superstition. 
One  such  superstition  leads  to  another.     The  same  writer,  quoted 

we  have  thereby  fallen  from  the  high  appellations  of 'a  royal  priesthood,  a  holy 
nation,  a  peculiar  people.'  "  JNo  one,  we  think,  can  doubt  that  these  theologians 
are  a  peculiar  people. 

1  It  may  be  of  public  use  to  state  that  this  Cross  was  not  allowed  to  remain 
on  St.  Mary's  Church.  The  good  "  intentions"  of  the  "  Rector"  were  frus- 
trated by  the  Christian  opposition  and  perseverance  of  the  Church  Wardens 
and  Vestrvmen.  The  latter  thought  that  the  "  Greek  Cross "  was  so  much 
like  the  Latin  Cross,  that  the  difference  could  not  be  translated  ;  and  they 
therefore  voted  to  veto  its  erection.  Nevertheless,  the  "responsibility"  was 
assumed  to  veto  the  vote ;  and  the  Greek  Cross  was  put  upon  the  acroterium 
and  the  acroterium  upon  the  apex  of  the  pediment.  The  Vestry,  however, 
were  men  who  "  knew  their  rights,  and  knowing,  dared  maintain  them."  They 
voted  that  the  Greek  Cross  should  be  taken  down  from  its  ecclesiastical  eleva- 
tion ;  and  lo  !  in  the  midst  of  the  dubious  contest,  it  suddenly  disappeared  on  a 
dark  night.  Tradition  reports  that  the  work  of  demolition  was  done  thorough- 
ly ;  and  that  the  famous  Greek  Cross  is  now  lying  in  several  "rudiments  "  in 
the  cellar  of  an  adjoining  building.  The  "acroterium"  is  also  among  the 
"  lost  privileges." — Thus  triumphed  the  Protestant  Episcopalians  of  Burling- 
ton ! 


3S 

above  l>y  Bishop  M'llvaine,  goes  on  to  say  "  With  the  Cross  should 
be  associated  other  Catholic  symbols  still  more  than  even  itself,  vocal 
to  the  spiritually  discerning.  Such  are  the  Lamb  with  the  standard  ; 
the  descending  Dove  ;  the  Anchor;  the  Triangle;  the  Pelican  ;  the 
lcthus  (Fish,)  and  others."  "  Here  we  see  [adds  Bishop  M'llvaine] 
Symbols  for  the  Times,  as  well  as  Tracts."  p.  279. * 


xv.  gbscrcmcKt  of  fHatraftt, 

The  germ  of  this  restoration,  [says  Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  28],]  is 
quite  visible  in  the  following  mystic  language: 

"The  ordinance  of  Marriage  has  an  inwari!  and  spiritual  meaning,  contained 
in  it  and  revealed  through  it — as  if  persons,  to  place  themselves  in  that  human 
relation,  interested  themselves,  in  some  secret  way,  in  the  divine  relation,  (that 
of  Christ  and  the  Church)  of  which  it  is  a  figure." 

The  Bishop  of  New  Jersey  seems  to  have  a  peculiarly  solemn 
view  of  matrimony,  differing  somewhat  from  that  of  the  Prayer- 
Book.  In  regard  to  the  solemnization  of  this  ceremony,  he  says  : 
"  Marriage  should  always  be  performed  in  the  Church.  There  is  a 
departure  in  this  respect  from  her  provisions,  and  from  Christian 
propriety,  much  to  be  regretted."2  Now  amongst  "the  admirable 
provisions  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,"  is  the  Rubric,  which 
states  that  "  persons  to  be  married  shall  come  within  the  body  of  the 
Church,  or  shall  he  ready  in  some  proper  house.''''  It  is  very  evi- 
dent that  the  Bishop  is  a  "  dissenter  "  from  this  Rubric.3  His  zeal 
for  the  solemnization  of  marriages  in  the  Church,  may  possibly 
arise  from  his  peculiarly  solemn  view  of  the  nature  of  the  marriage 
contract;  and  perhaps  it  may  be  an  Oxford  "element  in  rudiment," 
waiting  to  break  through  "  reserve,"  and  to  rise  with  the  glory  of 
more  "active  development." 

The  Oxford  men  think  the  Church  has  a  right  to  multiply  sacra- 
ments to  any  extent ;  and  may  therefore  include  matrimony  among 
the  holy  rites.  Mr.  Newman,  speaking  of  the  five  additional  sacra- 
ments of  Popery,  savs :  "  They  are  not  Sacraments  in  any 
sense  unless  the  Church  has  the  power  of  dispensing  grace  through 
rites  of  its  own  appointment,  or  is  endued  with  the  gift  of  bles- 
sing   and    hallowing    the   'riles    and    ceremonies,'  which,  accord- 


1  "  Among  the  divine  ordinances  [says  Mr.  Newman]  are  a  number  of  more 
or  less  abstract,  or  (what  may  be  called)  disembodied  riles,  to  which  the  Church 
gives  a  substance  and  a  form  :  such  as  public  worship,  imposition  of  hands, 
benedictions,  and  the  sk;\  of  the  moss,  which  are  first  elements  of  actual  or- 
dinances, and  the  instrumental  principles  of  grace". 

2 Note  to  Keble's  Christian  Year,  p.  377." 

3  Yet  in  one  of  his  sermons,  Pillar  of  truth,  p.  23,  Bishop  Doane,  speaking 
grandly  of  his  Church,  which  he  certainly  loves  with  great  sincerity,  says  : 
"  Even  her  Canons  and  her  Rubrics  are  drawn  from  Scripture."  How  is 
this?      A  Bishop  against  a  Rubric,  and  both  Scriptural  ?      (Quere,  queer?) 


39 

itig  to   t be    ^Uili    Article,  it   '  hath   power  to  decree.'  Bur    \vk    may 

WKLL   BELIEVE  THAT  THE  ClIUKCII  HAS   THIS  GIFT."1       And  that  she 

will  exercise  it,  as  soon  as  she  is  Oxfordized  ! 


xvi.    ©clffcacw  o£  the  ©Icrfifi-— iHonastcrfes. 

The  celibacy  of  the  Clergy  is  a  doctrine  in  high  repute  at  Oxford, 
where  Romanism  finds  the  most  sympathizing  vindication  of  its 
abominations.  Mr.  Newman  (whom  the  Bishop  of  New  Jersey 
calls  one  of  "the  holy  three,''''  the  other  two  being  Dr.  Pusey  and 
Prof.  Keble)  says,  "As  far  as  clerical  celibacy  is  a  duty,  it  is  ground- 
ed, not  on  God's  law,  but  on  the  Church'' s  rule  or  on  vow."  So 
that  the  Church  may  at  any  time  enjoin  the  duty  of  the  celibacy  of 
the  clergy  !3  It  is  somewhat  singular  that  those  who  believe  in  the 
peculiarly  holy  and  sacramental  character  of  matrimony,  should 
generally  be  the  very  persons  who  would  have  the  clergy  remain  in 
the  comparatively  unholy  (as  proved  by  history)  state  of  celibacy. 
Those  Tractarian  divines,  who  are  already  in  the  bonds  of  matri- 
mony, are  in  a  very  undesirable  dilemma,  their  practice  having  an- 
ticipated their  doctrine,  and  given  a  "Providential  homage"  to  the 
scriptural  view. 

Dr.  Pusey  praises  "  the  height  of  holiness  of  whole  bodies  of  men  in  the 
Church  of  Rome."  Bishop  M'llvaine  remarks:  "  This  of  course  can  mean 
nothing  else  than  corporate  religious  bodies,  Monastic  bodies.  Then  this 
eminent  holiness  of  the  Church  of  Rome  is  to  be  found  in  her  Monasteries, 
among  her  Monks  !  Of  course,  we  are  to  look  for  it  in  those  countries  where 
Monastic  Bodies  flourish  in  all  the  glory  and  holiness  of  those  days  of  monastic 
peace,  when  (he  sound  of  the  trump  of  Luther  had  not  yet  broke  upon  the 
silence  of  the  cell,  or  disturbed  the  quiet  of  the  Litany  of  St.  Alary  !"  p.  295. 

This  "height  of  holiness,"  which  is  attainable  through  those 
means  of  grace,  the  Monasteries,  is  recommended  by  the  Tracta- 
rians  to  be  sought  for  after  the  same  Romish  manner.  The  En- 
glish papers  state  that  a  building  is  used  at  Oxford  for  Monastic  pur- 
poses, with  a  convenient  number  of  cells  for  young  English  Monks. 


1  This  quotation  and  a  few  others  have  been  taken  from  Mr.  Goode's  master- 
ly exposition  of  Tractarianism,  in  his  "  Case  as  it  is." 

2  There  have  been  persons,  at  various  times,  in  the  established  Church  of 
England,  who  were  not  unfavorable  to  clerical  celibacy.  Queen  Elizabeth,  the 
female  "  Head  of  the  Church,'  refused  to  allow  the  marriage  of  priests.  Strype,  in 
his  Jtnnals,  ch.  3,  states:  "But  among  the  good  acts  of  Parliament,  one  was 
wanting,  tho'  as  it  seems  labored  at  by  the  Protestant  divines  to  be  brought 
about.  It  was  to  revive  King  Edward's  Act  for  the  Marriage  o(  Priests,  which 
Queen  Mary  (the  Papist)  had  repealed.  But  the  Queen  (Elizabeth)  would 
not  be  brought  so  far  to  countenance  the  conjugal  state  of  the  Clergy.  This 
troubled  not  a  little  the  Divines,  especially  such  as  were  married.  Of  this 
matter  Sandys  speaks  in  a  letter  to  JJurker,  telling  him,  'That  no  law  was 
made  concerning  the  Marriage  of  Priests,  but  that  it  was  left,  as  it  were,  in 
medio ;  [or  in  via  media]  and  that  the  Queen  would  wink  at  it,  but  not  estab- 
lish it  by  law.  Which  is  is  nothing  else,  said  he,  but  to  bastard  our  Children.' 
The  Inconvenience  hereof  was  that  the  Clergy  were  fain  to  gel  their  Children 
legitimated."  So  much  for  an  arbitrary  Head  of  the  Church  !  Perhaps  a 
few  years  may  find  a  Royal  Head  of  similar  views. 


40 

xvn.    3Jicfcdtfcs  In  the  ©futrch  Jaevbice. 

1.  Lichted  candles  in  the  Church.  "  Two  lights  blioulJ  be  placed  upon 
the  Altar,  according  to  Ed  war  J  the  6th's  order,  ratified  in  our  present  Prayer- 
Book.  We  think  it  plain  that  these  candles  were  meant  at  the  Reformation,  to 
be  lighted,  as  bad  been  usual,  during  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist." 
Quoted  by  JU'Jlvaine,  p.  280. 

2.  Peculiar  decorations  ox  feast  days. — "There  should  be  some  spe- 
cial decoration  on  festival  days;  altar  coveiings  and  pulpit  hangings  of  unusual 
richness;  or  the  natural  flowers  of  the  season  woven  into  wreaths,  or  placed 
(according  to  primitive  custom)  upon  the  altar.  These  should  be  chosen  with 
especial  reference  to  the  subject  of  the  Festival.  White  flowers  are  most  pro- 
per on  the  days  consecrated  to  the  blessed  Virgin,  as  emblematic  of  sinless 
purity  ;  purple  or  crimson  on  the  several  Saints'  days,  to  signify  the  blood  ot 
martyrdom;  and  on  All  Saints'  day  and  the  Holy  Innocents,  white  should  bo 
intermingled,  as  a  memorial  of  Virgin  innocence.  The  decoration  of  the  chan- 
cel should   be  the  especial  privilege  of  the  Minister  himself."  p.  2S0. 

3.  Bowisgs,  genuflections,  &c.  "  Persons  should  be  encouraged  to 
make  obeisance  on  entering  Church;  and  the  Minister  should  never  approach, 
or  pass  the  Altar  without  doing  reverence,  as  is  customary  at  this  day  in  some 
of  our  Cathedrals,   p.  281. 

Some  of  these  ridiculous  Papal  mummeries  are  very  fashionable 
at  Oxford;  and  a  few  of  the  Highest  Church  in  this  country  have 
already  begun  to  practice  thetn.  The  mummeries  used  by  Laud  in 
St.  Catharine  Creed,  London,  are  even  now  in  the  progress  of  repe- 
tition by  his  idolizing  followers  at  Oxford. 

The  fact  that  these  doctrines  always  tend  to  these  outward  follies 
proves  their  inward  corruption,  and  their  identity  with  Popery. 


xviii.  gjse  of  liomfsh  prai?cr=i)oo&s,  an*  rules  of 
JFastfng, 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

"  It  is  known  that  their  mere  reprint  "An  ecclesiastical  Almanac  has 
of  devotional  works  have  brought  on,  been  published,  for  the  guidance  of  Ox- 
ulready,  a  new  era  among  publishers;  fordisls  amid  the  riches  of  the  ancient 
.  .  .  procuring  a  market  for  such  books  services  as  found  in  the  Roman  and 
as  never  sold  before."  [Very  likely  !]  Parisian  Breviaries.  In  this  is  a  se- 
Bf.Ex.\>.  160.  lection  from  old  Catholic  Service  books; 

.  .  with  minute  rules  of  the  Roman 
Church  as  a  guide  to  in ilivi duals  for 
abstinence  and  fasting."  282. 

The  Tractarians  also  regard  it  as  "  a  very  delightful  sign  of  the 
times  that  Parker,  in  Oxford,  finds  it  his  interest  to  import  a  large 
number  of  copies  of  the  Roman  and  Parisian  Breviaries  for  private 
devotion."  Bishop  M'Ilvaine,  p.  282. 


xix.  Serb  tee  in  an  unftnoton  tontjtte. 

Bishop  M'Ilvaine  remarks:  "That  these  writers  have  said  any 
thing  positively  in  favor  of  service  in  an  unknown  tongue  is  not  as- 
serted; but  their  whole  system  of  Reserve,  of  sacred  veils  over 
"  awful  mysteries,"  to  conceal  them  from  the  eye  of  the  profane,  and 


41 

of  the  use  of  all  those  sacred  symbols  which  only  the  initiated  are 
supposed  to  be  capable  of  reading,  indicates  the  very  principle  on 
which  the  Service  in  an  Unknown  Tongue  in  the  Romish  Church  is 
defended."  p.  282. 

It  may  be  added  that,  as  early  as  Tract  9,  the  following  language,  expressing 
some  regret,  is  used  in  reference  to  the  change  from  the  Latin  to  the  En- 
glish language:  "Services  were  [at  the  Reformation]  compressed  into  one, 
which  had  been  originally  distinct;  the  idea  of  united  worship,  with  a  view  to 
which  identity  of  time  and  language  had  been  maintained  in  different  nations 
vas  forgotten ;  the  identity  of  time  [canonical  hours]  had  been  abandoned, 
and  the  identity  of  language  [Latin]  could  not  be  preserved.  Conscious  of  the 
incongruity  of  primitive  forms  and  modern  feelings,  our  Reformers  undertook 
to  construct  a  service  more  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  their  age.  They 
adopted  the  English  language:  they  curtailed  the  already  compressed  ritual 
of  the  early  Christians,"  &c. 

This  mournful|latiguage  sounds  very  much  as  though  the  Oxford 
men  thought  their  vernacular  anything  but  a  privilege- 


xx.  Bfsuse  of  ^reaciifita. 

Bishop  M'Uvaine  justly  remarks  "how  little  use  there  is  in  fre- 
quent preaching,  for  all  the  purposes  of  the  Oxford  system."  "  Why 
may  not  a  whole  congregation  of  such  persons  be  equally  profited 
by  the  mere  contemplation  and  preaching  of  the  sacred  '  Catholic 
Symbols'  above  described,  the  Triangle,  the  Fish,  the  Anchor,  the 
Pelican,  added  to  the  manipulations  and  genuflexions  of  the 
Priest,  his  divers  bowings  and  incensings,  accompanied  with  the 
aid  of  rich  altar-cloths,  symbolic  candlesticks,  splendid  sacerdotal 
vestments,  and  enchanting  choral  music?"  p.  283.  Bishop  M'U- 
vaine also  quotes  on  same  page  a  Tractarian  writer,  as  sayino- ; 

"  The  church  is  out  of  her  place,  converting  in  a  Christian  coun- 
try!" 

Tract  87  asserts:  "not  that  we  would  be  thought  entirely  to  deprecate 
preaching  as  a  mode  of  doing  good  ;  it  may  be  necessary  in  a  -weak:  and  lan~ 
guishing  state ;  but  it  is  the  characteristic  of  this  system  as  opposed  to  that  of 
the  Church  ;  and  we  fear  the  undue  exaltation  of  an  instrument,  which  Scrip- 
ture, to  say  the  least,  has  never  much  recommended." 

Tract  80  thinks  that "  so  far  from  it  being  considered  necessary  to  keep  per- 
tons  from  Church  on  account  of  irreligious  lives,  it  is  usually  thought  that 
every  thing  is  done  if  they  can  be  brought  to  it." 

A  great  deal  would  be  gained,  if  there  was  discipline  enough  in 
the  Church  to  keep  such  writers  from  the  pulpit. 


xxi.    auserbe  of  ilcUrjfotts  IXnotolc&flc. 

Bimop  M'Uvaine  remarks:  "  The  author  of  Tract  80,  considers 

that  in  the  days  of  the  Puritans  great  evils  arose  from  the  puttino- 

forward  of  divine  truth   ■  without  that  sacred  reserve,'  which  he  has 

been  ursine,.     •  The  consequence  of  this  indelicate  exposure  of  re- 

(j 


ligion  was  the  perpetration  of  crimes  almost  unequalled  in  the  an- 
nals of  the  world.'  That  is,  the  making  known  of  the  Gospel — 
the  preaching  of  the  death  of  Christ  as  an  atonement  for  the  sins  of 
the  world  ;  the  calling  of  sinners  to  flee  to  that  refuge  hy  repentance 
and  faith  ;  to  seek  rest  only  in  the  Cross  of  Christ — was  productive 
of  all  this  ruin  !  What  will  it  be  [adds  Bishop  M'llvaine]  when  the 
Gospel  is  preached  to  every  creature  ?"  p.  83. 

Mr.  Newman  (one  of  the  "holy  three")  also  says:  "The  Alexandrian  fath- 
er (Clement)  who  has  heen  already  referred  to,  accurately  describes  ihe  rules 
which  should  guide  the  Christian  in  speaking  and  acting  economically  ;"  one  of 
which  accurate  rules  is  :  "  He  both  thinks  and  speaks  the  truth,  except  when 

CONSIDERATION  IS  NECESSARY,  AND  THEN,  AS  A  PHYSICIAN  FOIl  THE  GOOD  OF 
HIS    PATIENTS,    HE   WILL   BE  FALSE,  OR    UTTEH    A    FALSEHOOD,    AS    THE    SOPHISTS 

say.  .  .  .  Nothing,  however,  but  his  neighbor's  good  will  lead  him  to  do  this. 
He  gives  himself  up  for  the  Cltuich." 

Tract  80,  says:  "  To  require,  as  is  sometimes  done,  from  both  grown  persons 
and  children,  an  explicit  declaration  of  a  belief  in  the  atonement,  and  the  full 
assurance  of  its  power,  appears  equally  untenable."  The  atonement  is  con- 
sidered "  a  great  secret." 

Bishop  M'llvaine,  with  every  evangelical  Protestant,  truly  says: 
"Our  grand  message  every  where  is:  'Be  it  known  unto  you, 
men  and  brethren,  that  through  this  man  is  preached  unto  you 
the  forgiveness  of  sin  :  and  by  him  all  that  believe  are  justified  from 
all  things  from  which  they  could  not  be  justified  by  the  law  of 
Moses.'  St.  Paul  waited  not  till  men  were  well  initiated  into  Chris- 
tian mysteries,  before  he  unveiled  the  grand  subject  of  atonement 
and  justification  through  the  blood  of  Christ.  No— the  Gospel  plan 
of  promoting  sanctification  is  just  the  opposite  of  holding  in  obscurity 
any  feature  of  the  doctrine  of  justification."  Bishop  M'llvaine, 
p.  540. 


xxii.  Kinase  OTcrshfp. 

We  quote  as  usual  Bishop  M'llvaine  :  "  That  these  writers  have 
advocated  Image  worship,  is  not  here  pretended.  But  that  they 
manifest  a  strange  tenderness  and  tendency  towards  the  abominable 
idolatry,  we  shall  easily  show.  This  is  one  of  the  subjects  which 
they  would  exclude  from  discussion  ;  but  if  it  must  be  discussed,  as 
with  transubstantiation,  they  would  not  rest  the  argument  on  Scrip- 
ture, because  there  may  be  a  difference  of  opinion  in  regard  to  its 
meaning;  but  on  Tradition.  As  if  the  simple  command,  '  Thou 
shall  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  image,'  <$fc,  which  any  one 
can  read  for  himself,  were  of  less  plainness  and  solemn  decision  than 
the  confused  folios  of  Tradition,  for  which  the  million  must  depend 
on  the  reading  of  the  few.'"  p.  284. 

After  quoting  from  the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  what  the  Oxford  men 
say  about  the  worship  of  images,  viz  :  "  it  is  dangerous  in  the  case 
of  the  uneducated,  that  is,  of  the  great  part  of  Christians,^  Bishop 
M'llvaine  proceeds  to  illustrate  "the  singular  tenderness  of  these 
writers  towards  the  idolatry  of  the  Romish  Church."     He  thinks  it 


43 

evident  that  these  divines  have  an  "extreme  tenderness  for  corrup- 
tions, which  tilled  our  Cranmers  and  Hookers  and  Jewels  with  loath- 
ing;" and  applies  to  them  the  following  from  the  Homily  against 
Peril  of  Idolatry:  "Away,  for  shame,  with  these  colored  cloaks  of 
idolatry,  of  images  and  pictures,  to  teach  idiots,  nay,  to  make  idiots 
and  stark  fools  and  beasts  of  Christians  "  Bishop  DFllvaine,  p.  2S4, 
291. 


xxin.  Ei-aMtfou. 

Tradition,  though  really  a  top-stone,  is  converted  at  Oxford  into 
a  corner-stone  of  the  system. 

"  We  have  reserved  all  that  we  have  now  to  say  about  the  Oxford  error  of 
Tradition  for  this  place,  because,  though  theoretically  it  would  seem  to  be  a 
starting  point  for  all  the  errors  of  doctrine,  we  regard  ii  as  in  practice  one  of  the 
last  to  be  adopted.  The  sinner  tirst  says  in  his  heart  there  is  no  God,  and  then 
he  goes  to  hunt  after  arguments  in  support  of  his  atheism.  So  the  Romish 
Church  firt-t  declined  into  great  errors,  and  then  invented  her  doctrine  of  Tra- 
dition for  a  defence.  So  it  is  with  Oxfordism.  Its  doctrine  of  Tradition  is 
not  practically  the  source  of  all  its  other  peculiarities,  but  its  wall  of  protection 
for  them  against  the  Scriptures.  The  need  was  first  felt,  and  then  the  cordon 
sanitaire  was  drawn."     liis/iop  M'llvaine,  p.  307. 

The  extracts  under  this  important  head  will  show  that  the  Trac- 
tarians  adopt  in  substance  the  Romish  view  of  Tradition,  rendering 
it  authoritative  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Word  of  God. 

1.  The  Oxford  men  and  Bishop  Doane  (with  the  Romanists) 
maintain  the  existence  of  Ai'ostolic  traditions  in  addition 
to  the  Word  of  God. 

Bisiiue  Doane.  Bishop  MTlvaine. 

Bishop  Doane  asks  whether,  "  in  our  "It  is  to   me,  I  confess,  a  matter  of 

zeal   against  the  very  name  of'tradi-  surprise  and  shame,  that  in  the   19th 

lion.'  we    forget  that    Paul   speaks   of  century,  we  should  really  have  the  fun- 

ihem  !    As — to  the  Corinthians  (1  Cor.  da  mental  position  of  the  whole  system 

11.  2.)  'keep  the  ordinances,'  (or  tra-  of  Popery  re-assertetl   in  the  bosom  of 

ditions,)  'as  I  delivered  them  to  you.'  that  very  Church,  which  was  reformed 

And  to   the    Thessalonians  (2,  2.  15.)  so  determinately  three  centuries  since 

'hold    tlie    traditions   which    ye   have  from  this  very  evil.      What!    Are  we 

beer,  taught,  whether  by  word  or  our  to  have  all  the  fond  tenets,  which  for- 

cpistle  ;'    and   again,    (2,  3.    6)    'that  merly  sprung  from  the  traditions  of  men 

walked  disorderly  and  not  after  the />-«-  re-introduced,   in    however  modified   a 

ditions  which  he  received  from  us.'  "  p.  form,  among  us!"    Quoted  lnj  Bishop 

124.1  M'Ilvaine,  p.  309. 


1  "  It  becomes  incomparably  more  alarming  when  we  learn  with  what  latitude 
the  word  Tradition  is  understood.  It  includes,  as  we  gather  from  the  oft  re- 
peated statements  of  the  learned  author  [Keble]  '  unwritten  as  well  as  written  ' 
tradition,'  certain  remains  or  fragments  of  the  treasure  of  Apostolical  doctrines 
and  Church  rules;'  in  other  words  an  oral  law, '  independent  of,  and  distinct 
from  the  truths  which  are  directly  scriptural ;'  which  traditions  are  to  be  receiv- 
ed 'apart  from  all  Scripture  evidence,  as  traditionary  or  common  laws  ecclesias- 
tical.' So  that  it  appears  that  Scitii'rriiK  and  OKWBITTBH  as  well  WBITTEH 
thadition  are,  taken  together,  the  joint  rule  of  faith." — M'Ilvaine,  p.  310. 


44 

When  we  consider  that  no  allusion  to  unwritten  injunctions  is  con- 
tained in  the  writings  of  the  fathers  of  the  first  two  centuries  ;  (which 
was  certainly  the  most  probahle  period  for  their  prevalence) — that 
the  fathers  of  the  third  and  fourth  centuries  frequently  differ  from 
each  other  in  matters  of  greater  or  less  importance,  in  such  a  way 
as  to  show  the  impossibility  of  any  traditions  which  were  infallible; 
— that  the  first  appeal  to  floating  traditions,  as  containing  articles  of 
belief  in  addition  to  Holy  Writ,  was  made  by  the  Valentinian  here- 
tics;1— that  it  was  the  common  manoeuvre  of  heretics  to  prefer  this 
claim  ;3 — and  particularly  when  we  consider  that  the  fathers  them- 
selves always  appealed  to  Scripture  as  the  only  infallible  rule  of  fai'.h 
and  practice,  it  seems  incredible  that  any  person,  with  the  Bible  in 
his  hands  and  its  spirit  in  his  heart,  should  still  resort  to  such  a 
phantasm  of  man's  imagination.  "  This  we  do  affirm  that,  having 
four  different  accounts  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  last  written 
for  the  very  purpose  of  making  the  account  complete,  and  above 
twenty  Epistles  written  by  the  Apostles  to  explain  it  still  further — to 
say  that  any  thing  at  all  important  has  been  omitted,  is  a  libel  upon 
that  Holy  Spirit  by  whom  the  Apostles  were  guided."3  Let  those, 
who  are  disposed  to  profane  the  word  of  God  by  exalting  tradition, 
remember  the  words  of  our  Lord  against  the  Pharisees  who  were 
great  advocates  of  oral  communications:  "Why  do  ye  transgress 
the  commandments  of  God  by  your  tradition?"  (Mark  7,  9.)  And 
again,  "  ye  have  made  the  commandment  of  God  of  none  effect  by 
your  tradition.  (7,  13.)  And  again,  "beware  lest  any  man  spoil 
you  after  the  traditions  of  men."  (Col.  2,  8.) 

2.  Bishop  Doane  agrees  with  the  Catholics,  in  maintaining  that 
the  Bible  is  an  ubsouke  book. 

Bisuop  DoAxn.  Brsnop  M'Ilvaine. 

In  reply  to  the  remark  that11  the  "  Yes,  you  may  rely  upon  it,  breth- 
Bible  is,  in  the  judgment  of  Oxford  ren.this  'joint  rule  ol  faith'  will  never 
men,  a  very  obscure  book,"  Bishop  D.     long  consist  with  the  simplicity  of  the 

1  Irenxus  says  of  these  heretics:  "  When  they  are  reproved  from  the  Scrip- 
tures, they  immediately  begin  to  accuse  the  Scriptures  themselves;  as  if  they 
were  not  correct,  nor  of  authority,  and  that  they  are  not  consistent;  and  that 
the  truth  cannot  be  found  out  from  them,  by  those  ivhn  are  ignorant  of  tradi- 
tion." And  Ptolemy,  the  Valentinian,  expressly  asserts  that  "their  doctrine 
was  derived  from  Apostolical  tradition,  handed  down  to  them  by  a  successional 
delivery  from  the  Apostles."      Quoted  by  Goode,  vol.  I.  p.  309. 

2  So  usual  was  it  for  heretics  to  appeal  to  tradition,  that  Jerome  says  of  them 
generally,  that  they  were  accustomed  to  say — "  We  are  the  sons  of  those  wise 
men  who,  from  the  beginning,  have  delivered  to  us  the  doctrine  of  the  Apos- 
tles." "  Filii  sumus  aapientium  qui  ab  initio  doctrinum  nobis  apostolicam 
tradiderunt .'"      Goode,  vol.  I.  p.  309. 

3  This  quotation  is  from  "  Goode 's  divine  ru'e  of  faith  and  practice,"  a  work 
of  pre-eminent  ability,  and  suited  to  the  times.  This  book  settles  the  contro- 
versy with  Oxford  in  the  most  scriptural  style.  It  contains  a  mass  of  informa- 
tion which  is  of  great  practical  utility,  and  ought  to  be  in  the  hands  of  all  stu- 
dents, as  a  preservative  against  Popish  errors  in  regard  to  the  relative  authority 
of  Scripture  and  Tradition. 


45 

Bishop  Doank.  Bishop  M'Ilyaine. 

says:  "Well;  did  not  Peter  entertain     Gospel  .   .   Already    texts,  of  inspired 
very  much  the  same  judgment,  not  on-     Scripture  are  weakened  or  contracted 
ly  of  St.  Paul's  writings,  but  of  '  the     to   the   narrowest    and    most    doubtful 
other  Scriptures?'    2   Peter  3:    16. —     sense  .  .  .  All  this  is  but  too  natural." 
'  In  which  are  some  things  hard  to  be     p.  314. 
understood,  which   they   that  are   un- 
learned and  unstable  wrest,  as  they  do 
also  the  other   Scriptures,  unto  their 
own  destruction."1     p.  125. 

When  the  Bishop  of  N.  J.  thus  maintains  that  the  Bible  is  an  ob- 
scure book,  and  of  course  makes  Peter,  as  one  of  its  writers,  impeach 
his  own  wisdom  and  the  wisdom  of  God,  who  inspired  all  the  sacred 
writers,  he  endorses  one  of  the  main  perversions  of  Romanism.  On 
this  point,  our  only  safe  course  is  to  adopt  that  great  principle  of 
Protestantism  that  •«  However  obscure  any  of  the  doctrines  or  state- 
ments of  Scripture  may  be,  there  is  no  plainer  report  of  them  than 
we  can  find  there,  that  can  come  to  us  with  any  authority  to  bind 
the  conscience  to  belief." 

3.  Bishop  Doane  maintains,  with  Oxford  and  Rome,  that  the 
Bible  cannot  be  understood  without  the  aid  of  the  Church.3 

In  support  of  the  position  that  the         "  I  appeal  to  you   whether  we  have 

Bible   needs   an   interpreter,  Bishop  not  here  a  totally  false  principle  as- 

Doane  says,  '•  Was  it  Romish  in  the  serted  as  to  the  rule  of  faith.     I  appeal 

Ethiopian  Eunuch  to  answer,  and  in  to  you  whether  this  is  not  to  magnify 

St.  Luke  to  record  his  answer,  to  the  the   comments  of  men   above  the  in- 

Deacon  Philip — '  Understandest   thou  spired  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost.    I  ap- 

what  thou  readest !' — '  How  can  I,  ex-  peal  to  you  whether,  this  is  not  to  make 

cept  some   one    should  guide    me?'"  tradition  an  integral  part  of  the  canon 

Acts,  viii.  30.  p.  125.     .  of  faith."  p.  310. 

The  Bishop  of  N.  Jersey  must  be  pressed  in  the  service  of  Ro- 
manism to  otler  such  singular  proof.  In  the  first  place,  this  Ethio- 
pian Eunuch,  brought  up  in  barbarian  ignorance,  was  as  yet  unbap- 
tized,and  consequently,  according  to  High  Churchism,  he  was  tinder 
the  condemnation  of  mortal  sin,  and  therefore  unfit  to  be  a  teacher 
either  to  "  irreverent  dissenters"  or  to  "Catholic  Churchmen."  In 
the  next  place,  this  Ethiopian  does  not  say  "  How  can  I  understand 


1  "  It  occurs  to  us  that  the  danger  might  be  as  great,  perhaps,  of  wresting  the 
note  and  commentary,  as  of  wresting  the  text  to  their  own  destruction.  We 
think  that  of  the  two  modes,  the  Bible  itself  is  by  all  means  the  least  danger- 
ous, and  especially  for  the  unlearned  and  unstable,  who  would  fare  very  badly 
under  the  guidance  of  notes  and  comments,  made  peradventure  by  men  as  un- 
stable, if  not  as  unlearned  as  themselves." 

2  King  James  II,  told  Bishop  Burnet  that  the  reason  of  his  turning  Papist 
was  that  he  heard  so  much  from  the  English  divines  about  '•  the  authority  of  the 
Church,  and  of  the  tradition  from  the  Apostles  in  support  of  Episcopacy,"  he 
considered  that  other  traditions  might  be  taken  on  the  word  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  as  well  as  Episcopacy  on  the  word  of  the  English,  and  he  therefore 
thought  it  "  reasonable  to  go  over  to  the  Church  of  Rome."  Burnet's  hist,  of 
own  Times,  vol.  I.  p.  245,  quoted  in  Bib.  Rep.  1838,  p.  116. 


46 

except  some  High  Churchman  guide  me?"  but  "except  some  owe," 
that  is  any  one  who  understands  the  Bible. — In  the  third  place,  the 
Eunuch  was  not  in  possession  of  the  New  Testament,  but  was  read- 
ing a  prophecy  in  the  Old  Testament,  which,  if  interpreted  by  tra- 
dition, binds  us  to  the  use  of  the  Jewish  Talmuds,  including  Mishna 
and  Gemara. — In  the  fourth  place,  the  ignorant  Eunuch  acted  very 
wisely  in  calling  Philip,  or  any  one  else,  to  his  aid;  and  it  would  not 
be  amiss  if  some  others,  who  ride  in  their  High-Church  chariot,  would 
let  deacons  get  up  and  interpret  Scripture  for  them  too,  sometimes. 

4.  Bishop  Doane,  with   Oxford  and   Rome,  places  the  Church 

even  before  the  Bible. 
Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

In  reply  to   a   remork  that  an  in-         "The  false    principle   will    go  on, 

quirer  must  go  Jirst  to  the  Church  and  'eating    as  doth    a   canker.'     The  in- 

thcn   to    the  Bible,  Bishop    D.   says,  spired  word  of  God  will  he  neglected, 

"  And  is   not   this  the  veiiy  ghound  and  the  traditions  of  men  will  take  its 

on    which    St.  Luke    commended    the  place.     Traditions    and    Fathers    will 

Bereans  as  '  more  noble,'  in  that  they  occupy  the  first  place,  as  we  see  in  the 

•  received    the   word  '  spoken  by  Paul  sermons  of  the  chief  Roman  Catholic 

and    Silas,   and    [then]    searched    the  authors  of  every  age,  and  Christ  come 

Scriptures  daily  whether   these  things  next  or  not  at  all."    Quoted,  p.  314. 
were  so."  p.  12. 

But  if  inquirers  must  first  go  to  the  Church  and  to  Churchmen 
before  they  go  to  the  Bible,  the  question  arises,  which  is  the  true 
Church?  "I,"  says  the  Pope!  Or,  which  is  almost  the  same 
thing,  "  WE,"  say  the  Tractarians !  "By  no  means,"  affirm  the 
"  mixed  multitude"  of  dissenters,  "  the  Church  is  composed  of 

THE  FAITHFUL  BELIEVERS  AMONG   ALL    DENOMINATIONS  !"       So    that 

the  inquirer  is  more  bewildered  in  finding  out  the  true  Church,1  than 
in  discovering  the  true  meaning  of  the  Scriptures.  And  that  this  is 
really  the  case,  appears  from  the  fact  that  Christians,  though  differ- 
ing much  in  ecclesiastical  name  and  order,  profess  generally  the 
same  fundamental  truths.  We  have  always  supposed  that  the  Bere- 
ans were  commended  for  their  noble  spirit  in  searching  the  Scrip- 
tures. We  never  expected  to  hear  them  extolled  as  the  advocates 
of  tradition.     Bishop  D.'s  interpretation  is  probably  traditional. 

5.  "  Catholic  consent  "  is  the  great  standard  of  Biblical  inter- 
pretation with  Bishop  Doane  {as  with  Oxford  and  Rome.) 

Bishop  Doane,  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

"  The  true  Catholic  pastor,  who  thus  "  So  then,  we  are  to  search  the  in- 
receives    the    word  of  God    with    the     spired   Word  of  God,  not  as  the  one, 


i  Even  granting  that  the  only  true  Church  is  the  Episcopal,  nothing  could 
more  strikingly  show  the  folly  of  appealing  to  the  Church  for  an  infallible  inter- 
pretation of  Scripture  than  the  differences  of  opinion  between  Bishop  Doane 
and  Bishop  M'Ilvaine.  The  Bible  means  one  thing  in  .New  Jersey  ;  and  a  far 
different  thing  in  Ohio  ! 

Indeed  so  great  and  serious  are  these  variations  of  Episcopacy,  that  we 
feel  strongly  persuaded  that  Bishop  M'Ilvaine  would  not  admit  to  deacon's 
orders  a  person  who  departed  so  far  from  Scripture  as  to  vindicate  and  endorse 
the  Tractarian  system. 


47 

Bisnor  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

transmitted    witness   of   the  Church  ;  authoritative  rule  of  faith,  but   as   the 

who  guides  himself  by  the  Holy  Scrip-  document  of  what  this  Tradition  teach- 

tures,  not  us  he  understand*  them,  but  es — we  are  to  study  the  Scriptures,  not 

as  Catholic  antiquity  has  revealed  and  in  order  to  ascertain  simply  (rod's  re- 

Catholic  consent  has  kept  their  metui-  vealed   will,  bu'   to  prove  tradition    by 

inff,  will    be  chastised    and    schooled,  Scriptural  evidence — and  the  standard 

by   this  submission   of  bis  judgment1  of  revelation   is    no    longer    the    Bible 

to  the  wisp  and  good  of  every  age,  into  alone,  that  is,  the  inspired  word  of  the 

that    childlike-spirit    which    God    will  eternal  God   in   its   plain  and  obvious 

bless."    Troy  Sermon,  p   23.  meaning,  but  Scripture  and  Tradition, 

taken    together,  are  the  joint   rule   of 

faith  !"  p.  310. 

We  ask  whether  Romanists  arc  not  altogether  satisfied  with  Bi- 
shop D's  plan  of  asking  the  Fathers  the  meaning  of  the  Bible?  The 
spirit  of  blind  submission  to  Church  authority,  in  opposition  to  con- 
victions of  the  understanding,  (recommended  in  the  preceding  ex- 
tract) is  the  very  thing  to  bring  Scripture  into  disrepute,  and  of  course 
to  overthrow  the  foundations  of  religion. — As  to  "  Catholic  consent" 
it  has  been  well  described  by  Mr.  Goode :  "  It  is  just  the  consent  of 
some  half  a  dozen  Fathers  falling  in  wi:h  the  humor  of  the  individ- 
ual quoting  them  !"  The  Bible  can  hardly  refer  to  this  "Catholic 
consent,"  when  it  says  "  Search  the  Scriptures  ;  for  in  them  ye 
think  ye  have  eternal  life,  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of 
we." — The  reader  is  particularly  referred  to  the  remarks  on  "Cath- 
olic consent''  by  Bishop  Sherlock,  contained  in  a  note.3 

It  may  be  proper  in  this  connection  to  introduce  the  two  following 
quotations  of  Dr.  Doane,  as  being  natural  deductions  of  the  mysti- 
cal love  of  antiquity  and  tradition,  which  likewise  prevails  at  Ox- 
ford : 


'  "  We  hear  much  now-a-days  of  the  submission  of  our  understanding  to  the 
dictation  of  our  spiritual  instructors,  and  to  the  superior  wisdom  of  antiquity, 
as  though  the  surrender  of  our  own  judgment  and  the  blind  adoption  of  primi- 
tive usages,  were  only  another  name  for  Christian  faith.  Let  it  be  at  least  re- 
collected, that  the  humility  prescribed  by  the  Gospel  extends  to  every  portion 
of  the  human  race  alike  ;  to  the  teacher  no  less  than  to  the  pupil.  But  the 
humility,  attempted  to  be  taught  by  the  dictation  of  uninspired  men,  inculcating 
their  own  theories  as  portions  of  Holy  Writ,  if  it  encourages  the  prostration 
of  the  understanding  on  the  one  part,  is  no  less  favorable  to  spiritual  tyranny 
and  dogmatism  on  the  other."   Shultleivorth  on  Tradition,  p.  121. 

2  "As  for  expounding  Scripture  by  the  unanimous  consent  of  primitive  Fa- 
thers, this  is  indeed  the  rule  which  the  Council  of  Trent  gives,  and  which  their 
doctors  swear  to  observe.  How  well  they  keep  this  oath,  they  ought  to  consid- 
er. Now  as  to  this,  you  may  tell  them  that  you  would  readily  pay  a  great  de- 
ference to  the  unanimous  consent  of  Fathers,  could  you  tell  how  to  know  it; 
and  therefore  in  the  first  place  you  desire  to  know  the  agreement  of  how  many 
Fathers  makes  an  unanimous  consent:  for  you  have  been  told,  that  there  has 
been  'as  great  variety  in  interpreting  Scripture  among  the  ancient  Fathers  as 
among  our  modern  interpreters;'  that  there  are  very  few,  if  any,  controverted 
texts  of  Scripture  which  are  interpreted  by  an  unanimous  consent  of  all  the 
Fathers.  If  this  unanimous  consent  then  signify  all  the  Fathers,  we  shall  be 
troubled  to  find  such  a  consent  in  expounding  Scripture.  Must  it,  then,  be  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  greatest  number  of  Fathers  ?     This  will  be  a  very 


48 


Bishop  M'Iltaine. 
"But  what  (saith  Latimer)  is  to  be 
said  of  the  Fathers  1  How  are  they 
to  be  esteemed  ?  St.  Augustine  replies, 
giving  this  rule  also,  that  we  should 
not  therefore  think  it  true,  because 
they  say  so,  though  they  ever  so  much 
excel  in  holiness  and  learning. — The 
Fathers  have  both  herbs  and  weeds, 
and  papists  commonly  gather  the 
weeds,  and  leave  the  herbs."  p.  308. 


Bishop  Doank. 

[Speaking  in  reference  to  the  P. 
E.  Theological  Semi7iary  at  JV.  Y., 
of  -which  he  is  ex  officio  a  Trustee,] 
Bishop  D.  says  :  "  It  should  be  consid- 
ered whether  the  entire  omission,  or 
casual  notice,  of  the  study  of  the  Fa- 
thers, in  training  the  teachers  of  a 
Church,  which  every  where  appeals  to 
'  Holy  Scripture  and  ancient  authors,' 
and  receives  as  truth  only  that  which 
the  first  receivers  witnessed  of  as  true, 
be  not  a  strange  and  most  injurious 
omission.'  '  Epis.Address,  1842,  p.  9. 

Also,  "  it  should  be  considered,"  (as 
to  the  Seminary)  "  whether  the  promi- 
nence allowed  in  the  course  of  study 
to  the  Evidences  of  Christianity,  as  if 
it  were  an  open  question,  be  not  a  lay- 
ing again  of  the  foundations,  inconsis- 
tent with  the  position  of  a  Church, 
which  for  eighteen  hundred  years  has 
been  the  providential  witness  of  its 
truth."(!)  do.  p.  9. 

The  study  of  the  Evidences  of  Christianity  is  certainly  quite  use- 
less in  a  Church,  which  trains  up  her  children  to  avoid  "open  ques- 
tions" and  to  rely  with  instinctive  faith  upon  Catholic  consent  as 
interpreted  by  Apostolical  succession.  The  only  wonder  is  that  the 
Fathers  should  be  studied  at  all.      Why  not  "  Hear  the  Church1?" 

One  more  quotation  on  the  Rule  of  Faith  and  Tradition  will  be 
sufficient  for  the  purposes  of  this  Brief  Examination. 

Bishop  Doane.  Bishop  M'Ilvaine. 

[Bishop  D.,  ivlien  speaking  of  the  "  Not  for  one  moment  do  we  place 
Rule  of  Faith,  frequently  appeals  to]     tradition  on  the  same  level  with  the  all- 


"  Hence  the  stern  war  of  the  Oxford 
divines  against  the  study  of  the  Evi- 
dences of  Christianity,  as  a  way  of  be- 
coming established  in  the  truth,  in- 
stead of  hearing  the  Church,  and 
trusting  to  an  'instinctive  faith'  in 
her  testimony."  p.  194. 


hard  thing,  especially  for  unlearned  men  to  tell  noses :  we  can  know  the  opin- 
ion only  of  those  Fathers  who  were  the  writers  in  every  age,  and  whose  wri- 
tings have  been  preserved  down  to  us;  and  who  can  tell,  whether  the  major 
number  of  those  Fathers  who  did  not  write,  or  whose  writings  are  lost,  were  of 
the  same  mind  with  those  whose  writings  we  have?  And  why  must  the  major 
part  be  always  the  wisest  and  the  best  men  1  And  if  they  were  not,  the  con- 
sent of  a  few  wise  men  is  to  be  preferred  before  great  numbers  of  other  exposi- 
tors. Again  ask  them,  whether  these  fathers  were  infallible  or  traditionary  ex- 
positors of  Scripture,  or  whether  they  expounded  Scripture  according  to  their 
own  private  reason  and  judgment.  If  they  were  infallible  expositors  and  de- 
livered the  traditionary  sense  and  interpretation  of  Scripture,  it  is  a  little  strange 
how  they  should  differ  in  their  expositions  of  Scripture.  ...  If  they  expound- 
ed Scripture  according  to  their  oien  reason  and  judgment,  as  it  is  plain 
thet  did,  then  their  authority  is  no  more  sacred  than  their  reason  is;  and 
those  are  the  best  expositors,  whether  ancient  or  modern,  whose  expositions 
are  backed  with  the  bet  reasons." — Goode's  Div.  Rule,  p.  214-5. 

1  If  the  House  of  Bishops  intend  to  introduce  more  of  the  Fathers  into  the 
Seminary,  we  most  respectfully  suggest,  as  an  excellent  introduction  to  tht 
same,  "  Daille'  on  the  right  use  of  the  Fa/hers  " — a  standard  work  recently 
re-published  by  the  "  Presbyterian  Board  of  Publication." 


49 

Disuor  Doase.  B I  SHOP  M'Ilvaisz. 

"  Holy  Schiptuue  and  ancient  au-  perfect  word  of  God.    Not  for  one  mo- 

tiiobs,"  as  in   Brief  Ex.  p.   182,  and  ment  do  we  allow  it  any  share  in  the 

p.  209. —  Troy  Sermon,  p.  2.,  &c,  &c.,  standard  of  revealed  truth.     Scripture 

Again  :  "The  Church  evert/  where  ap-  and  Tradition,  taken  together,  are  not 

peals  to    'Holy  Scriptures  and  ancient  the  joint  rule  of  faith."  p.  312. 
authors.'"   Corn.  Add,  1842,  p.  9. 

This  "every  where"  appeal  of  Bishop  Doane  is  only  made  once 
(we  believe)  in  the  "  Book  of  Common  Prayer,"  and  then  in  a  pre- 
face to  a  particular  service  ;  and  even  then  in  a  different  sense  from 
I  hat  which  Bishop  D.  is  so  anxious  it  should  bear.1  Whereas  the 
Articles  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  expressly  maintain 
that  the  Bible  aloxk  is  the  rule  of  Faith.  Read  the  following  words 
of  the  6th  Article  :  "  Holy  Scripture  containeth  all  things  neces- 
sary to  salvation:  so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  therein,  nor  may 
be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  required  of  any  man  that  it  should  be 
believed  as  an  article  of  Faith,  or  be  thought  requisite,  or  necessary, 
to  salvation."  The  Homilies  of  the  Church  also  bear  equally  di- 
rect testimony  :  "  Let  us  diligently  search  for  the  well  of  life  in  the 
books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  and  not  in  the  stinking  pud- 
dles of  men's  traditions,  devised  by  men's  imagination,  for  our  justi- 
fication and  salvation  ;  for  in  the  holy  Scripture  is  fully  contained 
what  we  ought  to  do  and  what  to  eschew." 

If  such  be  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  in  her  Articles  and  Homilies, 
why  is  it  not  also  the  doctrine  of  her  divines? 

We  agree  most  sincerely  with  Bishop  M'llvaine,  that  in  regard 
to  to  the  doctrine  of  tradition,  "  Oxfordism  is  throwing  itself 
into  the  same  defence,  as  Romanism,  for  the  same  purposes, 
in  maintenance  of  the  same  errors."  p.  308, 


1  The  Preface  to  the  "  Manner  of  making  Deacons"  has  these  words,  upon 
which  Bishop  D.  lays  so  much  stress:  "  It  is  evident  unlo  all  men,  diligently 
reading  Holy  Scripture  and  ancient  Author*,  that  from  the  Apostles'  time 
there  have  been  three  orders  of  Ministers  in  Christ's  Church — Bishops,  Priests 
and  Deacons."  These  words,  so  frequently  quoted  by  the  Diocesan  of  New 
Jersey,  to  prove  that  his  Church  makes  tradition  the  interpreter  of  Scripture 
fall  many  degrees  short  of  the  Oxford  mark,  as  we  think  any  candid  mind  will 
admit.  As  this  is  the  only  passage  in  the  Articles  and  Ritual  of  the  Church 
to  prove  the  transcendant  authority  of  tradition,  it  is  not  strange  that  it  is  seiz- 
ed with  the  fresh  delight  attending  a  great  discovery,  and  quoted  and  re-quoted 
until  its  original  and  humble  meaning  is  quite  obscured  in  the  splendor  of  its 
glorification.  We  have  no  doubt  that  most  Episcopalians,  would  be  willing  to 
say,  that  the  passage  simply  implied  the  concurrence  of  ancient  authors  in  the 
actual  existence  of  the  Episcopacy  which  Scripture  at  lust  saticlionc.l. 

For  ourselves,  we  confess  that  the  passage  has  always  seemed  to  admit  that 
Diocesan  Episcopacy  was  very  difficult  to  be  found  in  Scripture.  This  inter- 
pretation derives  a  presumption  in  its  favor  from  the  fact  that  an  appeal  is  no 
where  else  made  to  "  Ancient  authors."  If  this  be  the  meaning  attached  to 
the  passage  bv  Bishop  Doanc,  we  rejoice  heartily  over  our  mutual  agreement. 
7 


50 


xxiv.  Apostolic  Succession-  %fgiH£iutrcft  &lafms,&c. 

The  doctrine  of  Apostolic  succession  was  one  of  the  first  points 
taken  up  by  the  Oxford  Tractarians,  as  appears  from  Mr.  PercivaPs 
letter.  We  deeply  regret  that  Bishop  M'llvaine  has  not  exposed  the 
absurdity  of  such  claims.  Indeed  we  can  hardly  account  for  his 
silence  on  this  point,  unless,  from  prudential  considerations,  he  was 
induced  to  avoid  an  additional  exciting  topic,  when  he  had  already 
thoroughly  overthrown  the  foundations  of  the  false  system.  Even  a 
calm  exposition  of  High-Church  claims  might  also,  perhaps,  have 
been  considered  too  personal  towards  some  in  the  "  House  of  Bi- 
shops."  In  our  remarks   under   this  head,  we  propose  to  show 

that  the  Tractarians  and  Bishop  Doane  agree,  [with  the  Papists] 
1.  In  the  necessity  of  a  regular  Apostolic  Succession  of  Bishops, 
through  which  channel  alone,  grace  is  transmitted.  And  2d.  conse- 
quently that  they  agree  in  unchurching  other  Protestant  Churches, 
and  in  abusing  the  Reformers.  We  shall,  also,  show  as  we  proceed, 
that  these  "  Catholic  peculiarities  "  were  not  entertained  in  the  early 
periods  of  the  English  Church. 

1.  The  Oxford  Tracts  and  Bishop  Doane  agree  in  maintaining 
the  necessity  of  a  regular  Apostolic  succession  of  Bishops,  through 
whom  alone,  as  in  a  channel,  grace  descends. 


Oxford  Writers 


agree  with 


Bisuop  Doane. 


"The  points  we  ought  to  put  for- 
ward are  the  following  : 

1.  The  doctrine  of  Apostolic  succes- 
sion, as  a  rule  of  practice. 

The  successors  of  the  Apostles  are 
those  who  are  descended  in  a  direct 
line  from  them  by  the  imposition  of 
hands."  J^ercival's  letter. 

[This  doctrine  is  continually  taught 
throughout  the  Tracts.  See  particu- 
larly Tracts  1,  4,  7,  10,  17,  24,  33,  52, 
54,  60,  74.  It  is  one  of  the  well- 
known  fundamentals  of  Tractarianism.] 

"  The  participation  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  is  essential  to  the  main- 
tenance of  Christian  life  and  hope  in 
each  individual ;  and  it  is  conveyed  to 
individual  Christians  only  by  the  hands 
of  the  successors  of  the  Apostles  and 
their  delegates,"  I'ercival. 


"Episcopal  authority  is  the  very  bond 
which  unites  Christians  to  each  other 
and  to  Christ."  Tract  10.  "None  but 
the  Apostles  and  their  deputies  could 
be  said  to  have  Christ's  warrant  for 
blessing  that  bread  and  that  cup.   And 


"  The  office  which  Timothy  held 
and  exercised  by  the  laying  on  of 
Paul's  hands,  is  transmitted  in  an  un- 
broken line,  entire  and  perfect  to  our 
time."    Office  of  a  Bishop,  p.  11. 


"They  committed  it  to  other  'faith- 
ful men,'  who  should  come  after  them, 
and  they  again,  in  an  unbroken  line, 
to  us."  Leeds  sermon,  p,  19. 

"  Yes,  could  1  swell  my  voice,  tin  it 
should  reach  from  Canada  to  Mexico, 
and  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific 
shore,  it  should  be  lifted  up  to  entreat 
all  who  heard  it,  not  to  be  content  with 
the  word  of  God,  without  that  minis- 
try and  those  sacraments,  which  are 
equally  his  ordinances,  and  equally  es- 
sential to  salvation."  &c.  Office  of  a 
Bishop,  p.  26. 

"  Episcopacy  is  the  Church's  living 
bond  of  union  with  Christ;  the  chan- 
nel in  which  the  grace  has  been  trans- 
mitted through  the  hands  of  the  Apos- 
tles, which  lends  their  virtue  to  her 
sacraments,  and  gives  to  penitent  and 


51 

OxFonu  WniTEiis  agree  with  Bisuop  Doane. 

this   is  a  matter  pbrtamvng  lo   each     faithful  hearts  assurance  of  acceptance 
man's  salvation."  Tract  52,  p.  7.  and  salvation  through  the  purchase  of 

the  blessed  Cross;  apart  from  which 
[Episcopacy]  it  [the  Church]  could 
have  no  connection  with  the  Apostles, 
and  could  claim  no  promise  made  to 
them."  Burning  Jius/t,  p.  23. 

Quotations  might  be  indefinitely  multiplied,  but  it  is  unnecessary. 
In  order  lo  show  the  zincertainty  hanging  over  the  Apostolic  succes- 
sion, we  quote,  as  a  specimen,  the  following,  from  the  9th  lecture  in 
Smyth's  admirable  work  on  this  subject: 

"  Hooker  admits  that  ordinations  had  oftentimes  been  effected  without  a  Bi- 
shop to  ordain,  '  and  therefore,' he  says,  '  we  are  not  simply,  without  excep- 
tion, to  urge  a  lineal  descent  of  power  from  the  apostles,  by  continued  succes- 
sion of  Bishops  in  every  effectual  ordination.  Stillingfleet  declares,  that '  by 
the  loss  of  records  of  the  British  churches,  we  cannot  draw  down  the  succes- 
sion of  bishops  from  the  apostles'  times.'  There  is,  in  fact,  no  reckoning  for 
the  first  five  hundred  and  ninety-six  years,  until  the  time  when  Augustine  was 
sent  from  Rome  to  re-establish  Christianity  in  Britain.  Nor  is  the  record  of 
these  five  hundred  and  ninety-six  years,  any  better  kept  at  Rome  than  in  Bri- 
tain ;  for  if  we  come  to  Rome,  says  Stillingfleet,  '  here  the  succession  is  as  mud- 
dy as  the  Tiber  itself,'  'and  what  shall  we  say  to  extricate  ourselves  out  of  this 
labyrinth  V  Who  can  tell  the  date  of  the  consecration  of  Augustine,  about 
which  a  late  prelatic  advocate  differs  from  himself  in  the  small  amount  of  fifty- 
four  years,  and  in  reference  to  which  we  find  Baronius  contradicting  Bede,  and 
Dr.  Inett  making  confusion  worse  confounded  1  The  archbishopric  of  Canter- 
bury, says  Dr.  Inett,  in  his  Origines  Anglicana;,  had  been  void  from  the  year 
1089,  in  all,  about  four  years,  and  the  bishopric  of  Lincoln  about  a  year. 
Towards  the  end  of  the  eighth  century,  this  same  see  was  divided  into  two 
parts  for  several  years.  Dr.  Inett  himself  affirms,  that  '  the  difficulties  in  that 
see  betwixt  the  year  768  and  the  year  800,  -were  invincible.'  Speaking  of  the 
death  of  Dunstan,  this  writer  further  states,  that  Ethelgar 'succeeded  to  the 
chair  of  Canterbury  the  year  following,  but  dying  the  same  year,  our  historians 
are  not  agreed  who  succeeded,  some  confidently  pronouncing  in  favor  of  Siri- 
cius,  and  others  of  Ellricus.'  " 

As  another  specimen  of  the  difficulties  of  hereditary  transmission, 
we  may  mention  the  historical  fact  that,  for  a  number  of  years, 
there  were  two  Popes,  each  claiming  supreme  jurisdiction,  and  the 
treasury  of  apostolic  succession.  Bishop  Doane,  in  denying  that 
Rome  is  the  "  essential  centre  of  unity,"  argues  as  follows  against  the 
Bishop  of  A  rath:  "  The  essential  centre  of  unity  !  A  pretty  figure, 
doubtless,  xc ere  it  true  !  But  how  was  it  when  there  were 
two  Popes?  Were  there  then  two  'essential'  centres? 
Or  which  was  which  T"  (Bf.  Ex.  p.  213.J  Now  we  ask  also, 
how  was  it  when  there  were  two  Popes  1  Were  there  then  two  de- 
positories of  Apostolic  grace  ?  or  which  was  which  ?  For  our- 
selves we  do  not  care  which  was  "  which  ,•"  for  we  abjure  this  eccle- 
siastical witchcraft,  which  professes  to  delineate  the  only  course  of 
the  regular  ministry  and  the  operations  of  God's  Spirit.  But  how 
our  friend,  Dr.  Doane,  is  to  decide  between  "which  and  which,"  is 
a  point  which  we  are  very  much  at  a  loss  to  determine.     We  should 


52 

not  advise  any  one  to  risk  his  salvation  upon  the  right  solution  of 
this  historical  puzzle.1 

In  regard  to  these  extravagant  and  absurd  opinions,  it  has  been 
well  remarked : 

"We  sincerely  pity  the  man,  who  believes  them.  His  chance  of  heaven,  if 
we  may  use  such  language,  is  on  his  own  principles,  slender  indeed.  The  man, 
whose  title  to  his  estate  depends  upon  his  being  able  to  prove  that  there  has 
been  no  invalid  marriage  in  the  line  of  his  ancestry  for  two  thousand  years, 
would  be  well  off,  compared  with  him  whose  hope  of  salvation  rests  on  the 
assumption  that  there  has  been  no  invalid  ordination  in  the  ecclesiastical  pro- 
genitors of  his  parish  priest  since  the  davs  of  the  Apostles.  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered that  one  invalid  ordination  (or  consecration)  would,  in  the  course  of  a 
few  generations,  vitiate  hundreds,  and  then  thousands.  Alas,  for  those  who  have 
no  hope  but  on  the  uninterrupted  succession  !"  Princeton  Review  for  1841, 
p.  154. 

Bishop  Burnet  remarks  to  the  same  purpose: 

"  The  condition  of  Christians  were  very  hard,  if  private  persons  must  certainly 
know  how  all  ministers  have  been  ordained  since  the  Apostles'  days;  for  if  we 
will  raise  scruples  in  this  matter,  it  is  impossible  to  satisfy  them  unless  the 
authentic  registers  of  all  ages  of  the  Church  could  be  showed,  which  is  impos- 
sible; for  though  we  were  satisfied   that  all   the  priests  of  this  age   were  duly 


1  Some  of  the  High  Church  have  lately  attempted  to  trace  their  genealogical 
table  through  the  early  English  Church  up  to  St.  Paul.  On  this  effort,  we 
make  two  remarks.  1.  The  existence  of  the  early  English  Church  no  one 
doubts;  but  it  is  not  an  established  historical  fact  that  Paul  ever  visited  Britain. 
We  quote  from  Burton'' s  Church  History,  used  at  St.  Mary's  Hall,  ivith  a  re- 
commendation by  Bishop  Doane.  "  We  need  not  believe  the  traditions  con- 
cerning its  first  conversion  [by  Paul] ;  and  it  is  right  to  add  that  the  earliest 
writer  who  speaks  of  Britain  as  having  been  visited  by  any  of  the  Apostles  is 
Eusebius,  who  wrote  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century ;  and  the  earliest 
writer  who  names  St.  Paul  is  Theodoret,  who  lived  a  century  /«<<?;•"  .' .' .'  Thus 
what  was  unknown,  or  indefinite,  in  the  first  centuries,  was  probability  in  the 
fifth,  and  certainty  in  the  nineteenth  ! — 2.  Our  second  remark  is,  that  notwith- 
standing the  existence  of  the  early  British  church,  the  Apostolic  line  of  suc- 
cession was  long  since  diverted  from  that  channel,  and  now  runs  through  the 
Popish  ordinations.  Augustine,  with  40  monks  was  sent  by  the  Pope  from 
Rome  to  England,  where  he  landed  in  596,  and  marched  to  Canterbury  in  ec- 
clesiastical style  with  a  waving  banner  and  a  silver  crucifix  !  Two  years  after, 
he  was  made  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  Primate  of  all  England  ;  the  Pope 
sending  the  Archbishop  a  pall,  with  presents  for  the  new  Cathedral,  including 
holy  relics,  &c.  Augustine  did  much  to  set  the  Church  in  Roman  order;  and 
hence  he  is  truly  called  "the  founder  of  the  English  Church  as  distinguished 
from  the  British  "  and  "  the  great  Apostle  of  England."  {Blunt,  p.  27.)  After 
his  death,  great  confusion  prevailed,  so  that  60  or  70  years  after,  there  was  only 
one  canonical  Bishop  in  all  England.  We  now  quote  from  Blunt's  Hist,  of 
Eng.  lief,  which  has  a  recommendatory  letter  by  Bishop  Doane  :  Two  of  the 
provincial  kings,  "consulted  together  on  the  actual  condition  of  the  church,  and 
came  to  a  determination,  in  which  the  church  itself  concurred,  to  send  a  priest 
of  their  common  choosing  to  Rome,  to  be  there  consecrated  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  -who  might  henceforth  supply  the  sees  of  England  canonically, 
and  set  in  order  its  ecclesiastical  rites.  Theodore,  a  monk  of  Cilicia,  was  ac- 
cordingly designated  by  the  Pope  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  [about  the  year 
670]  and  despatched  to  England."  (p.  31,  32.)  This  Popish  Monk  was  the  first 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  "to  whom  the  universal  church  of  England  submit- 
ted." He  ordained  bishops,  rc-ordaincd  those  whose  commission  was  irregular, 
and  reduced  the  ecclesiastical  affair?  of  the  island  to  some  order.     The  first  five 


53 

orJaineil,  yet  if  we  be  not  as  sure  that  all  who  ordained  them  had  orders  rightly 
given  them,  and  so  upward  till  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  the  doubt  will  still  re- 
main."   (Quoted  in  Ch.  Ubs.  '38,  p.  827. 

Nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that  the  Greatest  uncertainty 
and  obscurity  exist  in  regard  to  various  links  in  the  chain  of  Apos- 
tolic succession;  and  that  the  most  vile  doctrines  of  Anti-Christ  and 
the  most  disgusting  immoralities — such  as  cannot  belong  to  a  true 
Church — have  thoroughly  defiled  the  line  of  ancestry,  which  pre- 
tends to  exclusive  fellowship  with  the  Apostles. — Nor  is  even  the 
new  American  succession  entirely  free  from  all  canonical  doubt.1 
In  short,  this  theory,  unsupported  by  Scripture,  and  unsupportable 
by  fact,  is  a  visionary  idea  of  Popery  and  Uigh-Churchism.  It  was 
never  incorporated  in  the  system  of  the  Reformers,  who  framed  the 
Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  laid  the  foundalions  of  its 

Archbishops  of  Canterbury  were  Italians.  Blunt  further  states,  "There  is  much 
in  our  [subsequent]  history  that  is  dark,  intricate  and  uncertain.  Many  early 
church-records  have  perished  in  the  fires,"  (p.  43,) — such  as  those  which  con- 
sumed the  documents  in  the  "  Cathedral  of  Canterbury  soon  after  the  Norman 
conquest,"  and  "  St.  Paul's  Cathedral  with  its  chapter-house  and  the  ■writings 
contuined  in  it,"  during  the  great  fire  in  London. — So  that  the  English  ordina- 
tions were  thoroughly  Popish,  and  are  moreover  not  a  little  "dark,  intricate  and 
uncertain." 

1  The  chain  of  the  "  Scoto-.lnglican  "  or  American  succession  is  by  no  means 
perfect,  but  some  of  its  links  arc  certainly  cracked,  if  not  broken.  For  example, 
according  to  High-Churchism,  Baptism  is  the  instrument  of  justification  ;  or  as 
Bishop  Doane  expresses  it,  "  he  grafts  tliem  in  by  hoti/  baptism  into  the  living 
vine."  (Troy  sermon  p.  25.)  J\ow  two  of  the  earliest  Bishops  of  the  Ameri- 
can Episcopal  church  were  never  "  grafted  in  " — never  received  this  "  sacrament 
of  salvation  " — were  never  canonically  baptized  !  But  can  an  unjustified  person, 
who  has  not  submitted  tn  the  ordinances  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  stand  in  the 
place  of  the  Apostles?  Bishop  White  says  "  If  the  prejudice  should  prevail,  it 
is  very  unfortunate  that  two  of  our  Bishops  [Dr.  Provoost  and  Dr.  Jarvis] 
never  received  baptism  from  the  hand  of  an  Episcopalian  administrator.  So 
that  who  knows  what  scruples  this  may  occasion,  as  to  the  validity  of  many  of 
our  ordinations  ?  . .  .  There  would  be  no  certainty  of  a  Bishop  in  Christendom." 
(Mem  of  Ep.  Ch.  p.  282.)  Now  inasmuch  as  these  two  unbaplizcd  Bishops 
assisted  in  the  consecration  of  Bishops  Hobart  and  (Jriswold  in  1811.  the  whole 
of  the  present  House  of  Bishops  have  a  shadow  of  doubt  over  their  glory.  For 
Bishop  D.  admits  that  "an  ordination  which  is  merely  probable,  or  only  pro- 
bably sufficient  and  valid,  only  makes  a  probable  Jiisliofi,  or  one  who 
is  merely  probably  a  Bishop  .  .  .  True  and  valid  Episcopal  vocation  is  not 
merely  probable,  but  certain  and  undoubted."  (Brief  Ex.  p.  228  )  Now  the 
fact  that  various  ways  have  been  devised  to  prove  that  consecration  without 
baptism  is  not  defective,  shows  that  there  is  some  "doubt"  on  this  subject.  If 
we  take  one  of  the  solutions,  viz  :  that  "  baptism  by  a  layman  is  valid,  if  the  es- 
sentials arc  preserved  " — why  may  not  ordination  by  a  layman  be  valid,  if  the 
essentials  are  preserved  ?  Especially  as  Bishop  D.  tells  us  "  the  commission  to 
teach,  being  also  the  commission  to  baptize.  (Troy  sermon  p.  11.)  If  we  take 
another  solution,  viz:  that  "there  is  a  possibility  of  transmitting  the  Episcopal 
succession  through  persons  who  are  not  members  of  the  Church  " — why  may 
not  ordination  be  thus  transmitted  !  Whatever  solution  is  male,  it  must  equally 
benefit  Presbyterian  ordination,  because  "  the  commission  to  baptize  is  also  the 
commission  to  teach."  But  however  this  may  be,  it  is  very  unfortunate  that  such 
an  event  as  the  consecration  of  Bishops  who  were  never  "  grafted  in,"  should 
have  occurred  in  a  Church,  where  every  thing  is  claimed  to  be  Apostolic. 

But  what  adds  still  another  shade  to  the  shadow  is  the  consecration  of  181 1, 


54 

glory.  The  men  of  that  age  were  too  intent  upon  the  great  work 
which  engrossed  their  hearts,  to  embrace  a  dogma  of  Popery,  at 
variance  with  Scripture,  reason  and  history.  Says  Archbishop 
Whafehj :  "  Those  who  framed  the  Articles  of  our  Church  claimed 
no  sacramental  virtue  for  the  ordinances  which  they  administered, 
on  account  of  possessing  the  Apostolic  chain  of  succession,  which,  if 
one  link  be  broken,  the  whole  is  destroyed.  They  merely  claimed 
for  themselves  the  tille  of  being  regularly  ordained  ministers  of  a 
scripturally  constituted  Church  of  Christ.  Those  who  put  forward 
any  other  claim  were  attempting  to  remove  the  foundation  of  the 
Church  from  the  rock  on  which  it  had  been  built  to  place  it  on  the 

sand.  .     The   Reformers  put  forward   no  exclusive  claims." 

This  will  more  fully  appear  as  we  proceed  to  the  remaining  topic  of 
consideration. 

when  Bishop  White  (as  he  himself  tells  the  story)  "  in  the  imposition  of  hands 
on  each  of  the  two  Bishops  elect  [Hobart  and  Griswold]  omitted  the  words  'In 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Hohj  Ghost.'  The  officiat- 
ing Bishop  was  unconscious  of  the  omission  ;  and  the  first  intimation  of  it  to 
him,  was  by  Bishop  Jarvis  in  the  way  from  Church,  (p.  287. )  Now  inasmuch 
as  great  stress  in  favor  of  Episcopacy  is  laid  upon  the  text  "  As  my  Father  hath 
sent  me,  even  so  send  I  yon,"  it  is  certain  that  those,  who  make  every  thing  of 
forms,  must  feel  a  little  uncertainty  and  doubt  about  this  consecration,  in  which 
no  mention  is  made  of  the  Bishops  being  sent  either  by  the  Father  or  the  Son. 
Would  baptism,  with  no  mention  of  the  name  of  God,  be  considered  free  from 
canonical  doubts?  Why  then  otherwise  with  a  consecration  which  has  also  a 
set  form,  the  "  rubric  being  scriptural?'"  This  omission  of  Bishop  White 
made  no  small  stir  at  the  time  in  New-York;  and  led  to  much  discussion  in 
the  newspapers  and  in  a  pamphlet  by  an  Episcopalian.  The  mind  of  a  Church- 
man of  the  straitest  sect,  may  well  be  alarmed  at  the  omission  of  any  words, 
especially  such  important  words,  in  one  of  the  established  forms  of  the  Church. 

But  the  difficulty  is  increased  by  the  fact  that  both  of  the  errors,  or  variations 
from  Episcopacy  alluded  to,  were  unfortunately  concentrated  upon  the  same 
two  Bishops,  Hobart  and  Griswold,  the  latter  of  whom  is  now  the  respected 
presiding  Bishop.  For  not  only  did  Bishop  White  omit  the  name  of  the  Trin- 
ity, but  the  other  two  Bishops  who  assisted  at  the  consecration,  were  the  very 
two  (Provoost  and  Jarvis)  who  had  never  been  canonically  baptized!  Each 
omission  by  itself  might  well  cause  doubt  in  a  conscientious,  advocate  of  forms  ; 
but  when  the  two  are  blended,  assurance  of  no  invalidity  is  very  far  from  being 
"  doubly  sure." 

There  is  still  another  uncertainty  in  the  case  of  Bishop  Seahmy ;  who  fail- 
ing to  obtain  ordination  in  England,  was  obliged  to  seek  it  in  Scotland,  where 
he  obtained  it.  But  inasmuch  as  several  Covenanters,  who  had  never  received 
any  other  than  Presbyterian  baptism  and  ordination,  were  consecrated  Scotch 
Bishops,  how  is  it  known  that  this  bar  in  the  channel  did  not  prevent  Episco- 
pal virtue  from  reaching  Bishop  S.?  Moreover,  even  Perceval,  in  his  "  Apos- 
tolical Succession,"  adinils  that  the  consecration  of  Jliches,  the  non-juror,  was 
"  irregular  and  schismatical.'"  p.  133.  But  the  present  Scottish  succession  is 
derived  through  both  of  these  sources,  according  to  Perceval,  pp.  13G,  137, 
through  the  Covenanters  and  non-jurors;  and  as  both  are  corrupt  streams,  it 
follows  of  course  that  so  far  as  the  American  succession  is  "  Scoto,"  it  is  void. 
Bishop  White  (Memoirs,  p.  ICG.)  says  that  "  Bishop  Provoost  was  opposed  to 
having  any  thing  to  do  with  the  Scotch  succession  :  which  he  did  not  hesitate 
to  pronounce  irregular."  So  that  here  we  have  very  considerable  doubt  about 
the  first  Ameiican  Bishop,  who  of  course  has  communicated  great  ecclesiastical 
uncertainty  throughout  the  Diocese  of  Connecticut,  and  thus  throughout  the 
whole  Church ! 


55 


52.  The  Tractariana  and  Bishop  Duane  agree  in  unchurching 
other  Protectant  Churches,  and  in  abusing  the  Reformers.  This 
is  the  natural  result  of  their  pretension  to  Apostolic  succession,  as 
the  only  channel  of  grace. 

Oxford  WBiTEns  agree  with  Bishop  Doane. 

"  The  privilege  of  the  visible  Church  "Those  trumpet  words  of  Paul  to  the 


is  to  be  herein  like  the  ark  of  Noah, 
that,  for  any  tiling  we  know  to  the  con- 
trary, all  without  it  are  lost  sheep." 
Tract  74. 

The  English  Church  claims  to  be 


Ephesians  "  One  Lord,  one  Faith,  one 
Baptism,"  ate  shrunk  from  as  discour- 
teous to  the  great  Diana  of  our  Ephe- 
sus,  which  rejoices  in  that  descriptive 
title,  "  other  denominations."  p.  161. 
"  The  simple  faith  has  been  conced- 


merely  Reformed,  not  Protestant,  and     ed,  as   the  price  of  peace,  or   through 


it  repudiates  any  fellowship  with  the 
mixed  multitude,  which  crowd  togeth- 
er, whether  at  home  or  abroad,  under 
a  mere  political  banner."   Tract  71. 

"  So  far  from  its  being  a  strange 
thing,  that  Protestant  sects  are  not  '  in 
Christ,'  in  the  same  fulness  that  we 
are,  it  is  more  accordant  to  the  scheme 
of  the  world,  that  they  should  lie  be- 
tween us  and  heathenism.    Tract  47. 

"  We  are  of  'the  Church,'  not '  the 
Episcopal  Church  ;'  to  call  ourselves 
Episcopalians,  is  to  imply  that  we  dif- 
fer from  the  mass  of  dissenters  mainly  any  of  these  essentials,  may  be  safely 
in  church-government  and  form,  in  left  to  the  depth  of  the  riches  of  grace." 
matter   of  doctrine  merely,  and  not  of     Office  of  Bishop,  p.  28 


the  flattery  of  smooth  words,  to  the 
mixed  multitude  of  their  [Luther  and 
Calvin]  discordant  followers."  p.  161. 

"  Aye,  '  there's  the  rub  .''  But  really 
it  cannot  be  avoided.  The  '  Protest- 
ant denominations'  complained  of,  as 
unchurched  at  Oxford,  may  go  farther 
(to  Geneva)  and  fare  worse."  p.  36. 

"  The  seeming  harshness  of  the  in- 
ference, the  conclusion  that  the  loss  of 
salvation,   must  follow   the   failure   in 


[To  which  same  grace  may  be  safely 
commended  the  alienation  of  "  Catho- 
lic charity."] 


"  I  shrink  from  the  suspicion  of  a 
more  profound  respect  for  schism  in  a 
Geneva  cloak  than  in  a  Koman  vest- 
ment." p.  18'J. 

"I  look  with  equal  favor  on  the 
schismatic  of  every  form."  p.  189. 


fact,  whereas  the  difference  is,  that  we 
are  here  and  they  there  :  we  ix  the 
Chckcii,  and  they  out  of  it."  JJr, 
Crit.  26.  p.  341. 

"  I  repeat,  the  Bishops  are  Apostles 
to  us. — The  si EETiNGEits  have  no 
head,  they  are  all  mixed  together  in  a 
confused  way."   Tract  10. 

"  Whatever  be  our  private  differen- 
ces with  the  Homan  Catholics,  we  may 
join  with  them  in  condemning  Socini- 
ans,  Baptists,  Independents,  Quakers, 
and  the  like."   'Tracts,  vol.  1„  p.  603. 

These  quotations  sufficiently  indicate  the  spirit  of  the  Oxford 
Tracts,  and  of  the  Bishop  of  New  Jersey.  It  is  a  spirit  of  aliena- 
tion  from  Protestant  Churches,  and  a  rejection  of  their  title  to  the 
fellowship  of  Christ. 

Now,  any  one  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the  Reformation, 
knows  that  a  strong  unity  of  feeling  existed  between  the  Reformers 
in  England  and  on  the  Continent;  so  much  so  that  the  latter  were 
constantly  consulted  by  the  former,  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  Re- 
formation in  England.  John  Knox,  the  father  of  l'resbyterianism  in 
Scotland,  was  one  of  King  Edward's  Chaplains,  assisted  in  revising 
the  Liturgy,  and  in  forming  the  Articles;1  and  was  offered  a  Bish- 


1  M'Crie's  Life  of  Knox. 


50 

opric,  which  he  refused  from  conscientious  convictions.  Through 
the  agency  of  Archbishop  Cranner,  Bucer  and  Martyr,  both  foreign 
divines,  were  called  to  the  theological  chairs  of  Cambridge  and  Ox- 
ford, during  the  reign  of  King  Edward;  and  on  the  accession  of 
Queen  Elizabeth,  (says  Strype,  cka.pt.  21)  "  Peter  Martyr,  the  great 
divine  was  ardently  invited  to  come  again  hither."  Re-ordination 
was  not  considered  necessary  to  ecclesiastical  preferment  during  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth,  for  many  divines  who  had  been  ordained  abroad 
exercised  their  functions  in  the  established  Church.  Bishop  Burnet 
on  the  23d  Article  says  :  "We  are  very  sure  that  not  only  those  who 
penned  the  Articles,  but  the  whole  body  of  the  Church,  for  above 
half  an  age  after,  did,  notwithstanding  these  irregularities,  acknowl- 
edge the  foreign  Churches,  so  constituted,  to  be  true  Churches,  as  to 
all  the  essentials  of  a  Church."  In  1581,  when  collections  were 
taken  up  in  the  English  Churches  to  assist  Geneva  in  defending  her- 
self against  a  Popish  army,  the  Queen  and  her  Council,  in  their  let- 
ter to  the  Bishops,  call  this  "  a  needful  service  to  the  Church,"  and 
admit  that  "  that  poor  town  (Geneva)  hath  served  in  this  latter  age, 
for  a  nursery  unto  God's  Church."  (Strype's  Grindal,  p.  279)  And 
Grindal,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in  his  letter  to  the  metropolitan 
clergy,  commends  to  them  this  effort  "  for  the  defence  of  so  nota- 
ble and  sincere  a  Church."  (Strype' s  Grindal,  p.  290.)  Lord 
Bacon  also  writes  "Yea,  and  some  indiscreet  persons  have  been  so 
bold  as  to  use  dishonorable  and  derogatory  speech  and  censure  of 
the  Churches  abroad  ;  and  that  so  far  as  some  of  our  men  ordained 
in  foreign  parts  have  been  pronounced  to  be  no  lawful  ministers." 
In  1609,  when  the  Scotch  Bishops  were  consecrated,  a  question  was 
raised  by  the  Bishop  of  Ely,  whether  they  ought  not  first  to  be  or- 
dained Presbyters,  as  having  received  no  ordination  from  a  Bishop. 
Bancroft,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  was  present,  maintained 
"  that  thereof  there  was  no  necessity,  seeing,  where  Bishops  could 
not  be  had,  the  ordination  given  by  the  Presbyters  must  be  esteemed 
lawful,  otherwise  that  it  might  be  doubted  if  there  were  any  lawful 
vocation  in  most  of  the  Reformed  Churches."  So  likewise  Arch- 
bishop Usher,  although  he  thought  non-Episcopal  Churches  defect- 
ive, declared :  "yet  for  the  testifying  my  communion  with  those 
Churches,  which  I  do  love  and  honor  as  true  members  of  the  Church 
universal,  I  do  profess  that  with  like  affection  I  should  receive  the 
blessed  sacrament  at  the  hands  of  the  Dutch  ministers,  were  I  in 
Holland,  as  I  should  do  at  the  hands  of  the  French  ministers,  if  I 
were  in  Charcntone."  It  is  moreover  well  known  that,  at  the  Synod 
of  Dort,  1618,  five  English  divines,  including  three  Bishops,  took 
their  seats  officially  as  the  representatives  of  the  English  Church  ; 
and  though  they  defended  their  own  Church,  they  did  not  unchurch 
others.  Even  Archbishop  Sancroft,  who  was  a  non-juror,  enjoined 
it  upon  his  clergy,  in  1680,  to  pray  "  for  the  universal  blessed  union 
of  all  Reformed  Churches  at  home  and  abroad  against  our  coin- 
mon  enemies."  Archbishop  Wake,  in  1720,  says  that  he  would  not 
have  the  "  iron  heart"  of  "  certain  raving  writers,"  who  thought 
that  "  the  Reformed  Churches  have  no  valid  sacraments,  and  so 


57 


pronounce  them  scarcely  Christian"  But  it  is  useless  to  multiply 
testimonies.  The  London  "Christian  Observer  "  says  "  it  cannot 
be  denied  that  foreign  Presbyterian  ordination  was  practically,  how- 
ever inconsistently,  reckoned  valid  during  the  feigns  of  Edward,  Eli- 
zabeth, the  Jameses  and  Charleses."  Although  Episcopal  ordination 
since  that  time  has  been  always  necessary  to  preferment  in  the  Eng- 
lish Church,  we  do  not  believe  that  the  foreign  Protestant^Chufches 
have  ever  been  disowned  by  any  considerable  number  of  the  Eng- 
lish divines.  The  present  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  only  reitera- 
ted the  sentiments  of  his  predecessors,  from  Cranmtr  downwards, 
with  three  or  four  exceptions,  in  his  recent  reply  to  an  invitation  from 
the  "  Church  of  Geneva"  to  attend  the  Jubilee  in  honor  of  the  Re- 
formation. Dating  from  Lambeth,  1835,  he  acknowledges  on  be- 
half of  his  "brother  bishops"  as  well  as  himself,  their  "  high  re- 
spect for  the  Protestant  Churches  on  the  continent,  and  sincere  con- 
cern for  their  welfare."  lie  also  alludes  to  the  "  illustrious  men," 
who  were  the  means  of  "  rescuing  your  Church  [Geneva]  from  the 
shackles  of  Papal  domination."  Dr.  Whatcly,  the  present  Archbishop 
of  Dublin,  also  maintains  that  "  those  who  framed  the  Articles  of 
our  Church,  clearly  recognized  the  claim  of  every  Christian  com- 
munity, who  hold  the  great  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel, 
and  administer  the  ordinances  instituted  by  Christ,  lo  be  called  a 
Church  of  Christ." — Such  expressions  of  fellowship  with  other  Pro- 
testant Churches  have  been  generally  characteristic  of  the  Church 
of  England.  They  appear  in  strong  and  Scriptural  contrast  with 
the  unfriendly  exclusiveness  and  alienation  of  certain  Traclarian  and 
"  Protestant  Episcopal  "  divines. 

Let   us  now  briefly  examine  the  particular  cases  of  LUTHER 
and  CALVIN. 

Oxford  wniTF.ns  agree  with  Bishop  Doane. 


"  Really  I  hate  the  Reformation  and 
the  Reformers  more  and  more." 

Fronde,  p.  389. 


"  The  simple  faith  has  Buffered  com- 
promise, through  an  uth  eet  for 
Mahtin  Lutbkb and  Joan  Ualvut." 

p.  160. 
;  The  Reformation  was  a  limb  badly  "  While  the  Germ        and  Gexeva.it 

set — it  must  be  broken  again  in  order    glosses  are   rejected,  6lc  ,  the  Catholic 


to  be  righted."  do.  p.  433. 


"  Protestantism  in  its  essence  and  in 
all  its  bearing*  is  characteristically 
the  religion  of  corrupt  human  nature. 
— The  Protestant  tone  of  doctrine  and 
thought  is  essentially  anti-Christian." 
Br.  Crit.  1841,  p.  27,29. 

"  They  will  see  that  the  cry  of  '  Po- 
pery '  is  but  a  feint,  devised  by  the 
arch-enemy  of  the  Chuch,  whereby  to 
hurry  men  down  the  steep  of  ultra- 
Protestantism  to  its"uniform  end, — the 
'denial  of  the  LorJ  that  bought  them.'  " 
Tract  77,  p.  3G. 


8 


doctrine  which  Paul  preached,  will  be 
proclaimed  again — proclaimed  as  at  the 
first  and  owned  in  that  one  Cuirch," 
&c,  p.  162. 

"  There  is  no  ground  for  anxiety  !  It 
is  but  the  ejection  from  the  Church  of 
the  malign  influences  of  cant  and 
Calvinism,  that  now  disturbs  it  ;  cry- 
ing with  a  loud  voice,  as  of  old,  when 
they  come  forth."  p.  182. 
"  Whole  Babylon   is  down  ;   unroofed 

in  Luther' a  Reformation; 
The   walls   Juhn    Calvin    overthrew; 
Socinus  the  foundation." 

Some,  "  no  doubt  would  stop  the  de- 
molition at  the  middle  of  the  second 
line.  But  it  is  hard  to  jump  bui  half 
way  down  a  precipice."  p.  157-8. 


5S 

Oxford  writers  agree  with  Bishof  Doan£. 

"The     perverse     anti-ecclesiastical  "From    the  work    of  self-willbO 

spirit,  to  which  the  Reformation  on  the  German    hands,  making    more    haste 

Continent  gave  birth."'  Br.  Mag,  9,  than  speed,  there  have  proceeded  count- 

p.  359.  less  forms  of  error,  heresy  and  schism." 

Elizabetlitoivn  Sermon,  p.  17. 

"  Then  many  a  schism  o'erleaped  the  "  Then  many  a  6chism  o'erleaped  the 

banks,  banks, 

Genevese,  Lutheran  and  Scotch  diver-  Geneykse,  Lutheran  and  Scotch  di- 

sities."  .  versities." 

Quoted  in  Br.  J\Iitg.  9,  p.  31.  Quoted  by  Donne,  do.  p.  38. 

"God  forbid  that  we  should  ally  our-  "  So  the  German  Reformers  take  the 

selves  with  the  offspring  of  heresy  and  first  step  with  Lutiikh  and   Calvin, 

schism."    Tract  24.  and  the  last  with  Hegel  and  Strauss." 

Quoted  by  Doane,  do.,  p.  18. 

This  language  and  spirit  so  studiously  derogatory  to  the  Continent- 
al Reformers,  and  especially  to  the  great  names  of  Luther  and  Cal- 
vin, is  the  more  remarkable,  when  we  consider  the  influence  of  these 
two  eminent  men  in  framing  the  Articles  and  the  doctrinal  opinions 
of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England. 

As  to  LUTHER,  we  request  the  reader  to  attend  to  the  following 
statements  given  by  Bishop  MTivaine.  "  All  the  English  Reformers 
were  wont  to  speak  of  the  grave  and  excellent  judgment  of  Martin 
Luther,  that  most  singular  and  chosen  instrument  of  setting  forth  the 
Gospel  of  Christ."  (Prcf.  p.  6.)  "The  Articles  of  the  English 
Church  chiefly  derived  their  origin  from  Lutheran  formularies. 
Some  of  them  are  drawn  from  the  Confession  of  Augsburg,  others 
from  that  of  Wittemburg,  known  as  the  Saxon  Confession."  "  If 
any  person  could  but  sit  down  to  the  perusal  of  our  Articles,  in  utter 
forgetfulness  that  Europe  had  ever  been  seriously  agitated  by  the 
Calvinistic  dispute,1  and  with  nothing  in  his  mind  but  the  controversy 
between  the  Reformed  Churches  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  he  would 
then  clearly  perceive  that  those  Articles  were  constructed  for  the 
most  part  on  the  Lutheran  system,  and  principally  as  a  rampart 
against  the  almost  unchristian  theology  of  the  schools.  Thus  we 
have  two  very  important  auxilaries,  in  case  of  any  difficulty  in  un- 
derstanding the  precise  meaning  of  our  standard  compositions;  (1) 
the  writings  of  Luther  and  his  associates,  especially  of  Melancthon, 
together  with  the  Augsburg  Confession,  which  the  latter  composed, 
from  materials  prepared  by  Luther;  and  (2)  the  doctrines  of  the 
Church  of  Rome.     (See  Bishop  M'llvaine,  p.  321.) 

From  these  remarks  it  is  evident  that  Luther  ought  to  be  held  in 
high  esteem,  by  those  who  profess  any  attachment  to  the  Articles 
of  the  Episcopal  Church! 


1  Bis/top  Davenant  observes  that  Melancthon  "  for  the  substance  of  doctrine, 
acknowledged  his  agreement  with  Calvin."  And  Bishop  Burnet  is  obliged  to 
admit  concerning  Luther  that  "  it  was  no  wonder  if  he,  without  a  strict  examin- 
ing of  the  matter,  espoused  all  Austin's  opinions."     (l?th  Art.) 

Toplady  says  "  The  plain  truth  is,  Luther  himself  was  an  absolute  predesti- 
narian  ;  and  was  as  able  and  resolute  a  defender  of  God's  eternal,  irrespective 
decrees,  as  Calvin  or  any  other."    (613.) 


59 

As  to  CALVIN,  his  influence  upon  the  theology,  and  even  Litur- 
gy, of  the  Church  of  England  was  perhaps  greater  than  that  of  Lu- 
ther— certainly  it  was  very  extensive.     The  first  Liturgy  under  King 
Edward,  containing  a  number  of  things  at  variance  with  the  opinions 
of  the  Continental  Reformers,  Calvin  wrote  to  Somerset,  the  Lord 
Protector,  objecting  to  prayers  for  the  dead,  chrism,  and  extreme 
unction, — which  were  accordingly  expunged  at  the  revision  of  the 
Liturgy  in  1551.     Even  Heylin,  a  High  Churchman  of  the  strict- 
est sort,  admits:  "Here  the  business  might  have  rested  [without  be- 
ing revised]  if  Calvin's  pragmatical  spirit  had  not  interposed."    "  The 
first  Liturgy,  being  disliked  by  Calvin,  was  brought  under  revision." 
"This  wa^done  to  give  satisfaction  unto  Calvin's  cavils."  And  again, 
says  Heylin  :  "  The  great  business  of  this  year  was  the  taking  down 
of  Altars  by  public  authority;  the  principle  motive  whereunto  was 
in  the  first  place,  the  opinion  of  some  dislikes,  which  had  been  taken 
by  Calvin  against  the  first  Liturgy."     So  high  was  Calvin  in  King 
Edward's  favor,  that  Archbishop  Cranmer  wrote  to  him,  saving  that 
he  could  not  do  any  thing  more  profitable  than  to  write  often  to  the 
King.     Indeed  no  writer  speaks  disrespectfully  of  Calvin,  until  the 
rise  of  Arminianism  60  or  70  years  after  his  death.     Inasmuch  as 
Calvin's  Form  of  Church  goverment  differed  from  that  of  England, 
the  ground  of  the  respect  entertained  for  him    must   have  been  his 
doctrine.1    Indeed  the  great  body  of  English  Reformers  were  prcdes- 
tinarians.     The   martyrs,  Tyndal,  Lambert,  Barnes,  Patrick  Ham- 
ilton, John  Rogers,  Bradford,  &c,  were  all  predestinarians  in  doc- 
trine.    So  were  Cranmer,  Ridley,  Latimer,  Hooper,  Bucer,  Martyr, 
&c.     The  39  Articles  were  drawn  up  by  men  who  very  evidently 
professed  Calvin's  doctrine.     Bishop  Burnet,  who  was  himself  an 
Arminian,  says  (on  the  17th  Article)  "It  is  not  to  be  denied  but  that 
the  Article  seems  to  be  framed  according  to  St.  Austin's  doctrine." 
44  It  is  very  probable  that  those  who  penned  it  meant  the  decree  to  be 
absolute."     "The  Calvinists  have  less  occasion  for  scruple  [than  the 
Arminians;]    since  the   Article  does  seem   more  plainly  to  favor 
them.     The  three  cautions,  that  are  added  to  it,  do  likewise  intimate 
that  St.  Austin's  doctrine  was  designed  to  be  settled  by  the  Article." 
p.  220.     If  any  doubt  existed  as  to  the  theology  of  those  who  framed 
the  Article,  it  would  be  dissipated  by  reading  Novell's  Catechism, 
a  thoroughly  Calvinistic  production,  which  was  sanctioned  by  the 
same  Convocation  that  decided  on  the  Articles,  and  which  [accord- 
ing to  Bishop  JWlhaine,  p.  472.]  "  may  be  received  as  a  most  au. 
thentic  voucher  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  as  understood  in  the 
reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth."     Heylin  himself  admits  that  "  it  was 


1  Jewel!,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  writing  to  some  of  the  Continental  He- 
f.irmers,  after  regretting  that  the  Queen  would  not  sanction  a  more  thorough 
Reformation,  adds,  "  as  to  doctrine,  we  have  gone  to  the  quick,  and  are  not  a 
nail's  breadth  from  you  therein." 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  state  that  Presbyterians  prefer  a  different  form  of 
Church  government  from  that  contained  in  the  Articles;  and  of  course  thai 
they  take  eiceptions  to  those  Articles  which  relate  to  ihia  subject. 


60 

safer  for  any  man  in  those  times  to  have  been  looked  upon  as  an 
heathen  and  publican  than  an  anti-Calvinist."  Parker,  Grindal  and 
Whitgift,  the  three  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  during  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  were  all  Calvinists.  The  celebrated  Lambeth  Articles, 
put  forth  by  Whitgift,  were  rooted  and  grounded  on  Scriptural  Cal- 
vinism ;  and  "  whenever  occasion  offered,  Whitgift  labored  to  coun- 
tenance his  own  writings  by  those  of  Calvin;  and  especially  out  of 
Calvin's  Institutes,  yielding  him  the  title  of  a  famous  and  learned 
man."  Strype's  Whitgift,  p.  583.  This  Archbishop  ofCanterbury 
boldly  says  of  the  Calvinistic  Lambeth  Articles,  "  I  know  them  to  be 
sound  doctrine  and  uniformly  professed  in  the  Church  of  England 
and  agreeable  to  the  Articles  of  Religion  established  by  authority." 
Do,  p.  462.  Under  James  1.,  who  was  himself  a  Calvinist,  the 
Church  of  England  continued  to  adhere  to  the  principles  of  the  Re- 
formers; and  the  divines  who  represented  her  at  the  Synod  ofDort  were 
Calvinists.  Land,  however,  at  this  time  began  to  broach  his  Armin- 
ianism  ;  but  even  in  the  following  reign  of  Charles  I.,  the  great  majori- 
ty of  the  clergy  had  not  swerved  from  the  Articles.  Every  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  up  to  Laud,  was  a  Calvinist;  the  Puritans  and  their 
supporters  had  still  a  large  majority  in  Parliament ;  and  the  Court 
faction  of  Arminians  was  very  inconsiderable  in  numbers.  An  Ar- 
minian  clergyman  was  refused  his  degree  at  Cambridge,  as  late  as 
the  10th  year  of  Charles  I.  Oxford  also  continued  to  teach  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Reformation.  Indeed  the  Universities  taught  Calvinism 
from  the  days  of  Elizabeth  until  the  civil  wars.  Heylin  says:  "  It 
cannot  be  denied  but  that,  by  the  error  of  those  times,  the  reputation 
which  Calvin  had  attained  to  in  both  Universities,  and  the  extreme 
diligence  of  his  followers,  there  was  a  general  tendency  unto  his 
opinions."  He  also  adds  that  "  Calvin's  Book  of  Institutes  was,  for 
the  most  part,  the  foundation  upon  which  the  young  divines  of  those 
times  did  build  their  studies."  Heylin'' s  Hist.  626,  7.  Even  after  the 
Restoration,  under  Charles  II.,  Bishop  Saunderson  (who  wrote  the 
Preface  to  the  English  Prayer-Book)  says  "  Calvin's  Institutes  were 
recommended  to  me,  as  indeed  they  were  generally  to  all  young 
scholars  in  those  times,  as  the  best  and  perfectest  system  of  divinity, 
and  the  fittest  to  be  laid  as  the  groundwork  of  that  profession.  And 
indeed  my  expectation  was  not  at  all  deceived,  in  the  reading  of  those 
Institutes."  In  latter  years,  we  do  not  doubt  that  Arminianism  be- 
came the  prevailing  religion  of  the  divines  of  the  established  Church. 
So  that  the  celebrated  saying  of  Lord  Chatham  has  much  truth  in  it, 
that  the  Church  of  England  had  "  Calvinistic  Articles,  a  Popish 
Liturgy,  and  an  Arminian  Clergy.''''  Dr.  South,  also,  in  allusion 
to  Bishop  Burnet's  principle  of  interpretation  of  the  39  Articles,  which 
opened  the  door  not  only  to  Arminians  but  to  Arians  and  others,  de- 
clared that  that  prelate  had  given  the  Articles  "  forty  stripes  save 
one."  Notwithstanding  the  general  decline  into  Arminianism  which 
has  taken  place  since  the  Restoration,  a  large  number  of  the  most 
pious  and  learned  divines  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  both  in  England 
and  America,  revere  the  name  of  Calvin  as  a  great  theologian  and  a 
noble  Reformer. 


61 

Such  being  the  influence  of  LUTHER  and  CALVIN  upon  the 
Reformation  in  England,  (as  well  as  upon  the  revival  of  religion  on 
the  Continent)  is  it  not  singular  that  some  Christian  men  and  Church- 
men  should  be  found  in  the  19th  century  willing  to  unite  with  Papists 
in  reviling  their  characters,  depreciating  their  services  and  disown- 
ing their  Churches? 


Conclusion. 

Having  now  exhibited  the  doctrines  and  the  spirit  of  Oxfordism, 
we  shall  make  a  few  concluding  observations. 

1.  OxFORDISM    IS  A  FIKE-BliAND    IN    TIIE    HOUSEHOLD  OF    FAITH. 

It  is  a  system  which  commenced  its  operations  with  open  hostility 
lo  the  Protestant  churches.  Its  naming  dogma  of  Apostolic  succes- 
sion was  hurled  against  the  temple  of  the  '■'■Diana  of  Eii/iestis,"  to 
overwhelm  all  "other  denominations"  with  ecclesiastical  fire.  The 
spirit  of  the  whole  "  movement,"  both  in  England  and  in  this  coun- 
try, is  martial  and  aggressive.  It  is  a  spirit  that  provokes  contro- 
versy, that  engenders  strife  even  in  its  own  communion,  that  arrays 
Bishop  against  Bishop,  clergy  against  clergy,  periodical  against  peri- 
odical ; — a  spirit  that  casts  out  of  the  pale  of  Christian  fellowship  the 
Churches  of  the  Reformers,  and  builds  itself  up  by  the  promulga- 
tion of  doctrines,  adverse  to  the  principles  and  charity  of  the  Bible. 
Such  a  "movement "  must  do  incalculable  injury  to  the  cause  of 
Protestantism  in  general.  And  among  its  almost  necessary  re- 
sults is  the  reproach  it  brings  upon  the  Episcopal  Church  ;  exciting 
among  other  Churches  hostility  to  her  institutions,  and  a  suspicion 
of  their  legitimate  tendencies.  Nor  can  we  doubt — from  the  rising 
opposition  among  all  denominations  in  our  land  to  High-Church 
Episcopacy,  an  opposition  which  is  the  antagonist  of  the  unfriendly 
exclusiveness  that  gives  it  birth— that  the  Oxford,  High-Church 
party  are  engaged  in  an  enterprise  injurious  to  the  interests  of  true 
religion.  A  system  which  foments  so  much  discord  in  its  own 
Church,  and  so  much  resistance  from  other  Churches,  presents  kw 
scriptural  claims  for  its  adoption. 

2.  Oxfordism  is  directly  contrary  to  the  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England.  No  Church  in  Christendom  contains,  within 
so  small  a  compass,  such  a  complete  protestation  against  the  Oxford 
doctrines  as  is  contained  in  the  39  Articles.  The  Articles  were 
framed  with  an  especial  reference  to  that  corrupt  system,  overthrown 
by  the  Reformers,  which  the  Tractarians  are  now  laboring  with  en- 
ergetic perseverance  to  rebuild.  The  doctrines  of  grace,  beginning 
with  justification  by  faith— nil  drawn  directly  from  Scripture  alone — 
are  in  irreconcilable  opposition  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Tracts.  AH 
the  errors  of  Oxfordism,  from  Baptismal  justification  to  the  end  (not 
of  the  chapter,  for  that  is  nut  y  '  ended]  >f  the  present  movement, 
receive  from  the  Articles  the  most  authoritative  and  uncompromising 
condemnation.  Whilst  the  Articles  urge  the  sinner  to  go  to  Christ 
for  justification,  and  to  exhibit  a  holy  life  as  its  evidence,  the  Trac- 


tarians  point  to  the  Baptismal  Register  and  to  the  List  of  Church 
communicants.  The  whole  system  of  Oxfordism  is,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Bishop  M'llvaine,  "the  very  reverse  of  that  which  we 
have  learned  from  the  Scriptures,  and  which  our  Fathers  have  de- 
clared to  us;" — "an  abandonment  of  all  we  have  been  taught  by 
our  Church  to  believe,  to  be  the  true,  the  narrow,  the  only  way  that 
leadeth  unto  life."  Whatever  may  be  claimed  in  favor  of  Oxford- 
ism from  certain  passages  in  the  Liturgy,  it  requires  a  stronger  op- 
position than  No.  90  vs.  39  to  break  down  the  Articles  of  the 
Protestant  Reformed  Church  of  England. 

3.  Oxfordism  is  essentially  Romish  divinity.  Its  doctrines 
are  Romish  doctrines.  Although  all  its  followers  are  not  prepared  to 
bow  before  the  Pope,  they  agree  in  the  fundamental  elements  of  the 
Ralian  plan  of  salvation.  Luther's  was  a  true  saying  of  Henry 
VIII,  that  he  "  killed  the  Pope's  body,  but  saved  his  soul  alive.'''' 
The  Tractarians  exhibit  the  same  royal  (loyal)  concern  for  the  Papal 
life.  They  adopt  in  substance  or  in  "  rudiment,"  Baptismal  justifi- 
cation, mortal  and  venial  sins,  Purgatory,  Prayers  for  the  dead, 
Saints'  days,  the  substantial  Presence,  Sacramental  Signs,  Mumme- 
ries in  Church  Service,  Reserve,  Tradition,  Apostolical  Succession; 
&c,  &c. — in  short,  the  distinguishing  peculiarities  of  Romanism, 
The  "  Pope's  soul"  is  safe  enough  under  such  care.  These  doc- 
trines are  "  as  far  asunder  from  Protestant  doctrines  as  Trent  and 
Heaven."  And  the  persons  who  maintain  them,  "unroof  the  edi- 
fice and  deface  the  walls  of  Christian  faith,  leaving  nothing  thereof 
but  loose  altar  stones  for  the  idolatrous  sacrifices  of  Romanist?."1 
In  short,  Oxfordism  contains  "  the  very  soul  and  strength  of  all 
that  is  evil  in  the  Romanism  against  which  our  Reformers  protested 
to  their  last  breath  out  of  the  furnace  of  fire."  Bishop  J\rilvai?ic, 
p.  522. 

4.  Oxfordism  demonstrates  the  fallibility  of  forms,  as  a 
means  of  preserving  purity  of  doctrine.  There  can  be  no  question 
that  public  Standards,  Articles  of  belief,  Confessions  of  Faith,  &c, 
are  all-important  in  maintaining  among  different  Churches  the  true 
doctrines  of  Scripture.  No  Church,  however,  has  ever  yet  entirely 
succeeded  in  preventing  errors  from  creeping  in  unawares.  Some 
divines  have  been  accustomed  to  claim  more  for  the  Episcopal  Church, 
on  this  point,  than  history  will  bear  them  out  in  affirming.  Let  us 
hear,  for  example,  our  friend  Bishop  Doane: 

"Not  to  preach  Christ  in  the  Church  is  to  frustrate  the  purposes  of  God, 
and  make  the  crors  of  Jesus  ineffectual  in  the  salvation  of  sinners.  Go.  follow 
it  through  the  world.  Go  to  Germany,  go  to  Switzerland,  go  to  the  Puritan 
pulpits  of  Great  Britain,  and  come  buck  with  the  pilgrim  fathers  to  the  shores 
of  our  own  New  England  And  what,  to  the  descendants  of  those  unshrink- 
ing witnesses  of  Jesus,  is  his  Cross  now  become,  but  as  to  the  Greeks  '  foolish- 
ness,' and  as  to  the  Jews  a  '  slumbling  block  V  This  I  say,  where  the  order  of 
the  Apostles  has  been  preserved  with  the  truth  of  the  Apostles,  there  has  been 
no  such  fearful  exhibition ;  where  the  Cross  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  has  been 


Jackson,  quoted  by  Bishop  M'llvaine. 


63 

preserved  in  the  Church  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  it  has  suffered  no  6uch 
degradation.    Convocation  Sermon  '38,  p.  11. 

"  What  has  been  the  effect  in  Germany  and  Switzerland  ?  Where  are  those 
who  started  on  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  yet  Sfparated  themselves  from 
the  Church  1  Where  is  their  faith — what  is  it]  I  have  lived  in  a  land  peo- 
pled by  those  who  emigrated  from  this  country.  It  is  the  fashion  to  call  some 
of  them  the  pilgrim  fathers.  .  .  The  rankest  enormities  of  doctrine  are  now 
rife  among  the  descendants  of  the  pilgrim  puritans  that  ever  festered  on  the 
face  of  the  earth.  .  .  This  comes  of  the  separation  of  Uod's  truth  from  God's 
Church."  Jlildress  at  Coventry,  England. 

Again.     Bishop  D.  speaks  of  the  want,  in  other  Churches,  "of  those   iw- 

HEHENT    PIIIXCIPLES  OF   U.NIOX    WHICH   ALONE   CAN    BIMI    IN   ONE   LARGE   MASSES 

of  mankind;"  and  adds,  in  reference  to  other  denominations  thus  destitute, 
"Meanwhile  they  turn  instinctively  to  US."  [!  !  !]  Missionary  Bishop,  p.  13. 

Yes,  truly.  By  the  "instinctive"  power  of  the  association  of 
ideas,  we  turn  to  the  unfortunate  Church  of  England  to  behold  the 
fearful  divisions  which  now  make  her  the  object  of  sympathy  through- 
out Reformed  Christendom.  When  have  "ranker  enormities  of 
doclrine"  sprung  up  than  those,  which,  in  the  language  of  Bishop 
M'llvaine,  are  making  at  Oxford  "another  gospel?"  Alas,  for 
the  infallibility  (fur  the  claim  amounts  to  that)  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land !     The  dogma  of  Rome  is  hardly  more  absurd  ! 

But  let  us  briefly  show  from  the  history  of  the  English  Church 
since  the  Reformation,  that  her  forms  have  failed  to  secure  this  boast- 
ed uniformity  of  doctrine. — For  more  than  half  a  century  after  its 
secession  from  Rome,  the  leading  divines  of  the  Reformed  Church, 
with  all  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury,  were  professedly  Calvinis- 
tic  in  doctrine.  This  was  in  accordance  with  the  39  Articles,  which 
were  framed  on  the  sub-lapsarian  or  milder  form  of  predestination, 
before  Arminius  was  born-     In  the  reign  of  Charles  I,  and  the  pri- 
macy of  Laud  (both  of  whom  were  afterwards  brought  to  the  block) 
Arminianism,  which  had  been  creeping  in  during  the  preceding  reign, 
became  more  and  more  popular  under  the   operation  of  "  the  inhe- 
rent principles  of  Union"  in  the  Church.     In  the  progress  of  this 
singular  ecclesiastical  revolution,  "  large  masses  of  men"  who  be- 
came dissatisfied  with  Church  and  State,  overturned  both  Arminian- 
ism and  Royalty.     The  orthodox  English  divines  were  now  assem- 
bled by  order  of  Parliament  at  Westminster  Hall  to  re-establish  the 
Church  upon  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  and  to  re-model  the 
defective  government  of  the  hierarchy.    These  divines,  all  of  whom 
had  been  episcopally  ordained,  were  unanimously  Calvinistic  in  sen- 
timent.    They   formed   the   Presbyterian   Confession   of  Faith, — a 
noble  monument  of  their  piety  and  learning,  whose  principles,  with 
those  of  the  39  Articles,  will  be  remembered  in  glory,  when  hierar- 
chies, Church  forms,  and  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  have  all  van- 
ished away. — In  the  meanwhile  the  civil  Revolution  progressed  ;  and 
in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  the  Episcopalians  and  Presbyterians,  King 
Charles  was  beheaded   without  the  honors    of  martyrdom,  (which 
were  bestowed  afterwards  ;)  and  Cromwell  was  elevated  to  the  place 
that  had  been  occupied  by  the  former  "  Heads  of  the  Church,"  four 
of  whom  had  been  male  and  two  female.     Independency,  with  all 
sorts  of  "  heresies  and  schisms,"  was  now  triumphant  in  the  midst 


64 

of  the  confusion  of  Episcopacy  and  Presbytery.  The  "  inherent 
principles  of  union  "  contained  in  the  39  Articles  and  in  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  were  unable  for  a  time  to  resist  the  power  of  "  large 
masses  of  men." 

After  the  Revolution,  Arminianism  and  looseness  of  morals  wero 
introduced  by  the  High-Church  Court  party  under  Charles  II,  wbo 
himself  died  a  Papist.  His  successor,  James  II,  was  also  a  Papist  ; 
but  before  this  "  Head  of  the  Church"  had  time  to  re-establish  Ro- 
manism, he  was  compelled  to  abdicate,  not  without  leaving  many 
staunch  friends  among  the  Episcopalian,  non-juring  divines,  who 
kept  up  a  spirited  ecclesiastical  controversy  about  the  allegiance  due 
to  a  Papal  King.  During  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  the  High- 
Church  Tories  attempted  to  carry  out  their  principles  by  means  of 
State  penalties  and  disabilities  of  the  most  atrocious  character,  which 
kept  the  Church  and  nation  in  a  state  of  continual  agitation.  On 
the  accession  of  the  House  of  Hanover,  religious  liberty  was  re- 
established in  the  State;  but  the  Church  found  herself  in  the  most 
mournful  and  humiliating  condition.  Arianism,  which  afterwards 
spread  into  the  dissenting  Churches,  invaded  the  Church  of  England 
through  the  auspices  of  Dr.  Samuel  Clark,  Rector  of  St.  James, 
Westminster, — which  station  he  occupied  until  his  death.  Infidelity 
and  Atheism  also  exerted  a  pestilential  influence  throughout  the 
land  ;  the  Arminianism  of  the  age  imposing  few  restraints  against 
the  influence  of  the  writings  of  Lord  Bolingbroke,  Lord  Shaftsbury, 
Collins  and  others.  At  this  period,  vital  religion  exerted  but  little 
sway  in  England;  and  the  morals  even  of  the  clergy  were  loose 
and  corrupt.    Says  the  present  Bishop  of  Calcutta  :   "  The  decline 

FROM    THE    PRINCIPLES     OF    THE    REFORMATION,     which  had  begun 

•under  our  first  Charles,  and  which  had  been  lamentably  increased 
by  the  fanaticism  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  latituclinarianism 
and  immorality  of  the  times  following  the  restoration  of  the  Royal 
Family,  still  chilled  the  warmth  of  public  devotion,  and  the  efficien- 
cy of  parochial  ministrations.  The  infidel  writers,  fostered  by  this 
state  of  things,  had  been  refuted  indeed  by  argument,  but  had  not 
been  sufficiently  repelled  by  the  most  powerful  of  all  weapons — the 
holu  doctrines  and  consistent  lives  of  the  ministers  of  the  Christian 
Church." 

About  this  period,  (fortunately  for  England  and  the  world)  there 
arose  within  the  established  Church,  a  new  society,  called  Metho- 
dists, which  now  comprizes  very  "  large  masses  of  mankind"  in- 
deed. The  Articles,  the  Liturgy,  the  Homilies,  the  Slate  Organization, 
the  Universities,  the  Bishops,  were  no  obstacles  to  John  Wesley. — 
His  followers  increased,  in  spite  of  all  "  the  inherent  principles  of 
union"  that  were  in  the  Church  of  "Apostolical  Succession."  And 
one  great  reason  of  the  rapid  progress  of  Methodism,  was  the  deplo- 
rable laxity  of  doctrine  and  life  in  the  establishment. 

The  London  "  Christian  Observer"  says  of  its  own  Church  : 

"  If  we  advert  to  the  days  of  Whitfield  and  Wesley,  we  shall  find  that  the 
great  charge  against  those  "  enthusiasts,"  as  they  were  called,  was  that  they 


65 

preached  justification  by  faith  instead  of  works;  the  majority  of  the  clergy  de- 
nouncing the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  as  hostile  to  the  interests  of  moral- 
ity. In  this  shape,  the  dispute  came  down  to  the  present  century.  Our  clergy 
had  nearly  lost  sight  of  the  true  Protestant  Scriptural  doctrine. .  .  The'practice 
was  not  then  common  of  using  the  language  of  Scripture  and  our  own  Articles, 
but  of  appropriating  the  justification,  predicated  in  them,  to  baptism.  .  .  The 
clergy  very  generally  disclaimed  altogether  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith, 
and  earnestly  [■?]  exhorted  men  to  justify  themselves  hy  good  living.  They  in 
fact  adopted  the  Papists'  second  justification,  losing  sight  of  the  first."  Vol.  38, 
p.  496. 

Toplady,  of  the  established  Church,  hears  even  stronger  testi- 
mony of  the  general  decline  of  religion  in  his  times,  or  just  before 
the  American  Revolution. 

"  Where  shall  we  stop?  We  have  already  forsook  the  good  old  paths  trod 
by  Christ  and  the  Apostles:  paths  in  which  our  Reformers  also  trod,  our  mar- 
tyrs, our  bishops,  our  universities,  and  the  whole  of  this  Protestant,/,  e.  of  this 
once  Calvinistic  nation.  Our  Liturgy,  our  Articles  and  our  Homilies,  it  is  true, 
slill  keep  possession  of  our  Church  walls:  but  we  pray,  we  subscribe,  we  as- 
sent one  way  ;  we  believe,  we  preach,  we  write  another.  In  the  desk,  we  are 
verbal  Calvinists  ;  but  no  sooner  do  we  ascend  a  lew  steps  above  the  desk,  [into 
the  pulpit]  than  we  forget  the  grave  character  in  which  we  appeared  below, 
and  tncr  the  performance  with  a  few  minutes'  entertainment  compiled  from  the 
fragments  bequeathed  to  us  by  Ptlagius  and  Arminitts ;  not  to  say  by  Arius, 
Socinus,  and  others  still  -worse  than   they.  ...  Is  thkre  a  single   heresy, 

THAT  F.VFIt  ANNOYED  THE  CHRISTIAN  WortLl),  WHICH  HAS  NOT  ITS  PRESXHT 
PARTI  ZANS     AMONG     THOSE     WHO      PROFESS     CONFORMITY     TO     THE    CllCRCH     OF 

England  J"  p.  275. 

Let  us  hear  the  testimony  of  the  immortal   YV ilber force : 

'Towards  the  close  of  the  last  century  [i.  e.  alter  the  restoration  and  before 
1700]  the  divines  of  the  established  church  professed  to  make  it  their  chief  ob- 
ject, to  inculcate  the  moral  and  practical  precepts  of  Christianity,  which  they 
conceived  before  to  have  been  too  much  neglected;  but  without  sufficiently 
maintaining,  often  even  without  justly  layinc,  the  grand  foundation  of  a  sinner's 
acceptance  with  Cod,  or  pointing  out  how  the  practical  precep's  of  Christianity 
grow  out  of  her  peculiar  doctrines,  and  are  inseparably  connected  with  them. 
By  this  fatal  prror,  the  very  genius  and  essentia!  nature  of  Christianity  was  im- 
perceptibly changed.  She  no  longer  retained  her  peculiar  characters,  or  pro- 
duced that  appropriate  frame  of  spirit  by  which  her  followers  had  been  charac- 
terized. Facilis  descensus.  The  example  thus  set  was  followed  during  the 
present  century.  Thus  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Christianity  went  more  and 
more  out  of  sight ;  and  as  might  naturally  have  been  expected,  the  moral  system 
itself  also,  being  robbed  of  that  which  should  have  supported  it  with  life  and 
nutriment,  began  to  wither  and  decay.  At  length,  in  our  own  days  [1 797] 
these  peculiar  doctrines  have  almost  altogether  vanished  from  the  view.  Even 
in  the  greater  number  of  our  sermons,  scarcely  uny  traces  (f  them  are  to  be 
found."  Pract.  Chr., chap,  G. 

These  testimonies  are  sufficiently  strong  and  humiliating  in  regard 
to  the  practical  variations  from  the  Articles  and  Liturgy,  which  so 
generally  prevailed  throughout  the  Church.  Hut  we  ought  not  to 
omit  mentioning  the  petition  of  nearly  two  hundred  and  fifty  of  the 
established  clergy,  in  1772,  presented  to  Parliament  for  relief  in  the 
terms  of  Church  subscription.  This  movement  seems  to  have  origi- 
nated with  the  Socinians  ;  but  it  was  opposed  in  Parliament  "  entire- 
ly  on  political  grounds."  During  the  discussion,  says  Robert  Hall, 
9 


66 

(in  his  Review  of  Lindsley's  Memoirs)  "  there  was  not  one  member 
of  Parliament  who  expressed  his  belief  in  the  Articles.  Mr. 
H.  Stanley  opposed  the  petition,  as  it  tended  to  disturb  the  peace  of 
the  country,  which,  in  his  opinion,  "  ought  to  be  the  subject  of  a 
fortieth  Article,  which  would  be  well  worth  all  the  thirty-nine." 
With  such  levity  and  contempt  (adds  Hall)  was  the  national  Creed 
treated  at  that  time.  The  fact  is  that,  through  the  irreligion  and  sec- 
ularity  of  the  clergy,  evangelical  truth  was  nearly  effaced  from  the 
minds  of  the  members  of  the  establishment  in  the  higher  ranks,  and 
that  an  indolent  acquiescence  in  established  formularies  had  succeed- 
ed to  the  ardor,  with  which  the  great  principles  of  religion  were  em- 
braced at  the  Reformation." 

The  revival  of  religion  in  the  Church  of  England,  which  follow- 
ed  these  disastrous  and  evil  days,  was  owing  mainly,  under  God,  to 
the  instrumentality  of  Wilberfore,  Hannah  Moore  and  their  associ- 
ates, who  made  the  "  Christian  Observer"  the  organ  of  their  senti- 
ments. Very  great  progress  was  made  in  re-modelling  the  practical 
religion  of  the  country.  Indeed  no  period  in  the  history  of  the  es- 
tablished Church  since  the  Reformation  has  probably  witnessed  more 
evangelical  piety  than  the  period  commencing  with  the  present  cen- 
tury. Yet,  lo !  in  the  midst  of  these  promises,  the  Oxford  heresy 
bursts  forth  !  Like  the  volcanoes  near  Rome,  its  rumblings,  indis- 
tinct at  first,  have  been  followed  by  smoke  and  flame,  and  fearful 
agitation.  This  development  at  Oxford  of  Italian  elements  presa- 
ges evil  to  the  unfortunate,  and  as  yet  we  fear  unhumbled,  Church 
of  England.  It  demonstrates  that  vain  is  the  wisdom  of  man,  and 
futile  all  the  forms  of  outward  defence,  unless  the  Lord  overshadow 
the  temple  with  his  glory. 

On  closing  this  brief  view  of  the  fallibility  of  liturgies  as  exem- 
plified in  the  English  Church,  we  do  not  deny  that  they  may  have 
exercised  many  beneficial  influences.  But  we  see  nothing  in  them 
that  is  calculated  to  preserve  religion,  when  the  Spirit  of  God  is  not 
in  the  hearts  of  the  clergy,  nor  do  we  see  any  thing  in  mere  forms 
to  cherish  spiritual  influences.  To  boast  of  forms  is  very  natural 
in  persons  who  entertain  unscriptural  and  extravagant  views  of 
Church  order  and  government;  but  far  better  is  it  to  follow  the  ad- 
vice of  inspiration  :     "  Let  him  that  glorieth,  glory  in  the  Lord." 

We  merely  express  an  humble  opinion  in  a  matter  of  history, 
when  we  declare  our  conviction  that  the  Presbyterian  Churches  both 
in  this  country  and  in  Scotland,  and  also  our  Congregational  Church- 
es have,  without  Liturgies,  possessed  at  least  as  much  sound  doc- 
trine and  piety,  during  the  last  and  present  centuries,  as  were  enjoy- 
ed in  the  Church  of  England,  according  to  the  statements  of  her 
own  divines.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this 
country,  previously  to  the  American  Revolution,  was  in  regard  to 
morals  and  evangelical  truth,  in  a  most  humiliating  and  woful  con- 
dition, notwithstanding  her  Articles  and  Liturgy.  It  also  appears  to 
us  to  be  a  fact  in  history  that  there  has  been,  during  the  same  period, 
at  least  as  much  looseness  of  doctrine,  including  Socinianism,  in 


67 

the  English  Church,  as  in  those  American  Churches,  whose  founders 
"  it  has  been  the  fashion  [according  to  truth]  to  call  the  Pilgrim  Fa- 
thers." 

Whatever  may  be  our  opinions  as  to  the  past,  the  Episcopal  Church 
is  warned  by  her  present  agitations  to  refrain  from  boasting  over- 
much in  regard  to  her  "  infallible  "  Liturgies.  May  she  be  endued 
with  power  from  on  high  to  purge  off  the  vile  fruit  of  Romanism, 
which  has  been  "grafted  in"  by  insidious  hands!  May  the  spirit 
of  the  Reformation,  which  framed  her  Articles  again  appear  to  carry 
them  out  in  the  power  of  their  own  glorious  truth !  Then  shall 
Tridentine  doctrine  no  more  pollute  the  sanctuary  of  England,  nor 
Gregory  stand  in  triumph  over  the  grave  of  Cranmcr ! 


68 
TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


General  opinion  of  Oxford  Tractarians, 
On  the  Popish  tendency  of  Oxfordism, 

1.  Justification,  * 

2.  Faith,  -  -  -  . 

3.  Sacraments  .  .  .   Baptism, 

4.  Sin  after  Baptism  .  .  .   Penance, 

5.  Mortal  and  Venial  Sins, 

6.  Purgatory, 

7.  Prayers  for  the  Dead, 

8.  Invocation  of  Saints, 

9.  New  Saints'  Days, 

10.  Transubstantiation, 

Prothesis,  Altar,  &c — Note, 

11.  Age  of  Miracles, 

12.  Extreme  Unction, 

13.  Anointing  at  Baptism  and  Confirmation, 

14.  Sacramental  Signs, 

15.  Sacrament  of  Marriage, 

16.  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy   .   .  .   Monasteries, 

17.  Novelties  in  Church  Service, 
19.  Use  of  Roman  Prayer-Books,  &.C., 

19.  Service  in  an  unknown  tongue, 

20.  Disuse  of  Preaching, 

21.  Reserve  in  communicating  Religious  Knowledge, 

22.  Image-worship,  ... 

23.  Tradition  .  .  .  Bishop  Doane's  singular  views, 

24.  Apostolic  Succession  .   .   .  High-Church  Claim?,  &c., 

The  English  Succession  through  the  Pope, — Note, 
The  American  Succession, —  Note, 
Unchurching  other  Churches,         - 
Unreasonable  abuse  of  Luther  and  Calvin, 

25.  Conclusion — 

1.  Oxford  Divinity  is  a  fire-brand  in  the  Church, 

2.  "  "  against  the  39  Articles, 

3.  "  "         essentially  Romish, 

4.  "  "  shows  the  fallibility  of  Liturgies 

in  preserving  doctrinal  purity, 


5 
6 
9 
16 
18 
22 
25 
27 
29 
30 
31 
32 
34 
35 
36 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
40 
40 
41 
41 
42 
43 
50 
52 
53 
55 
57 

61 
61 
62 


POSTSCRIPT. 

The  following  Card  appeared  in  the  Burlington  Gazette  of  Feb- 
ruary 10th. 

"BISHOP  DOANE  vs.  BISHOP  M'lLVAINE,  on  oxfobd  theologt." 

"The  only  notice  I  have  to  take  of  this  pamphlet,  'by  a  Presbyterian,'  is  to 
say,  that  the  professed  history  of  the  Cross  on  St.  Mary's  Church,  at  p.  37,  is 
entirely  untrue  ;  and  to  refer  whom  it  may  concern  to  the  Wardens  and  Vestry, 
for  the  authority  for  this  contradiction.  G.  W.  Doane. 

Riverside,  6  February,  1843. 

A  REPLY. 

The  Wardens  and  Vestry,  who  have  been  consulted,  by  no  means  sustain 
the  Rector's  assertion  that  "the  professed  history  of  the  Cross  on  St.  Mary's 
Church  is  entirely  untrue."  For  in  the  following  particulars,  the  statement  in 
the  note  is  found  to  be  "entirely  true;"  viz.  1.  A  Cross  was  eight  years  ago 
put  on  St.  Mary's  Church. — 2.  There  was  a  strong  feeling  against  it  in  the  Ves- 
try ;  so  much  so  that — 3.  The  Cross  had  to  be  taken  down;  and — 4.  It  was 
6ecrctly  taken  down  in  the  night.  I  find  that  my  chief  mistake,  and  an  important 
one,  consists  in  arraying  the  Rector  and  Vestry  against  each  other  officially. 
This  I  had  understood  to  have  been  the  fact  from  one  of  the  most  prominent 
Vestrymen  in  the  Church,  with  whom  I  had  an  accidental  conversation  a  few 
weeks  since,  on  board  of  a  steamboat.  I  endeavored  to  give  the  substance  of  the 
information  communicated;  and  although  there  were  a  number  of  items,  I  be- 
lieve after  all  that  I  have  failed  only  in  one  material  point.  After  the  lapse  of 
a  number  of  years,  it  is  not  strange  that  a  person's  memory  should  confound 
opposition  expressed  with  opposition  expressed  officially.  Both  my  own  mis- 
take and  his,  by  the  by,  show  how  very  hazardous  it  is  to  rely  upon  tbaiu- 
tio>-s. 

The  additional  explanations  which  seem  now  to  be  rendered  necessary,  in 
order  to  a  full  understanding  of  the  various  particulars  connected  with  the  his- 
tory of  this  famous  Cross,  are  the  following: 

A  plan  for  improving  the  church,  with  a  Cross  in  front  of  the  tower,  was 
adopted  by  the  Vestry,  a  majority  of  them,  however,  not  noticing  the  Cross  at 
the  time.  When  the  building  was  finished — to  their  great  surprise,  as  well  as 
that  of  many  in  the  community,  of  all  "denominations" — lo !  a  Cross  made 
quite  a  Catholic  appearance  on  the  apex  of  the  pediment!  Considerable  oppo- 
sition immediately  manifested  itself,  both  in  the  Vestry  and  out  of  it.  Those 
members,  who  objected  to  the  Cross,  declared  that  they  had  never  knowingly 
sanctioned  it;  but  it  was  replied  that,  by  voting  to  adopt  the  plan  in  general, 
they  had  sanctioned  all  the  particulars.  An  adjournment  having  been  carried 
to  postpone  a  direct  vote,  after  a  very  warm  meeting,  one  of  the  Vestry  shortly 
after  declared  that  unless  the  Cross  was  taken  down  very  soon,  it  should  be 
pulled  down.  This  alarmed  some  of  the  more  cautious,  who  thereupon  em- 
ployed a  carpenter  to  take  down  Cross  and  acroterium  in  the  night — without 
the  knowledge  of  the  Vestry.  A  very  profound  silence  was  observed  for  some 
time  in  regard  to  this  most  singular  and  mysterious  disappearance.  Even  many 
members  of  the  Vestry  obtained  no  information  whatever  about  it  ;  and  three  of 
them  informed  me  that  it  was  only  a  few  weeks  since,  that  ihey  became  ac- 
quainted with  the  circumstances  of  the  transaction.  This  "  reserve  in  the  com- 
munication of  religious  knowledge"  may  have  been  justifiable  at  the  time;  but 
in  regard  to  that,  I  express  no  opinion. 

"  A    PnESBYTEniAN." 

P.  S.  Since  writing  the  above,  I  learn  that  the  "Greek  Cross,"  which  was 
sawed  down  in  the  night,  has  been  re-placed  at  the  apex  of  the  pediment!  I 
rejoice  to  learn  that  this  work  was  done  in  the  day-time.  This  is  merely  states! 
as  a  matter  of  its  curious  history. 


70 

The  note  on  page  37,  when  corrected,  reads  as  follows: 

It  may  be  of  public  use  to  state  that  this  Cross  was  not  allowed  to  remain  on 
St.  Mary's  Church.  The  good  intentions  of  the  Rector  were  frustrated  by  tho 
Christian  opposition  and  perseverance  of  the  Church  Wardens  and  Vestrymen, 
many  of  whom  were  not  aware  that  a  Cross  was  in  the  Plan  until  it  made  its 
appearance  on  the  acroterium  at  the  apex  of  the  pediment.  The  "  Greek  Cross  " 
looked  so  much  like  the  Latin  Cross  that  the  difference  could  not  be  transla- 
ted ;  and  of  course  considerable  excitement  in  regard  to  it  immediately  en- 
sued. In  the  Vestry  fortunately  were  "  men  who  knew  their  rights,  and  know- 
ing, dared  maintain  them."  A  determination  was  manifested  to  have  the  Greek 
Cross  taken  down  from  its  ecclesiastical  elevation.  In  the  midst  of  the  contest, 
it  suddenly  disappeared  on  a  dark  night.  Tradition  reports  that  the  work  of 
demolition  was  done  thoroughly,  under  the  direction  of  one  or  two  of  the 
Vestry,  with  the  approval  of  the  Rector ;  and  that  the  Greek  Cross  and  acro- 
terium were  deposited  in  several  "rudiments"  in  the  cellar  of  an  adjoining 
building.      Thus   triumphed    the   Protestant   Episcopalians  of    Burlington! 


The  passer-by,  as  he  looks  up  to  this  Cross,  which  is  once  more  on  St.  Mary's 
Church,  beholds  one  of  the  "  efficacious  symbols  "  of  Oxford  theology.  Like 
that  theology — which  is  a  collection  of  Popish  fragments — this  Cross  has 
been  re-fitted  from  its  state  of  "  rudiment,"  and  formed  into  an  aspiring  "de- 
velopment;" and  although,  like  the  Tracts,  it  was  once  put  down,  it  has  again 
risen  into  ecclesiastical  notice,  at  the  See  of  the  Diocesan. — Truly,  as  Bishop 
M'llvaine  says,  "  Popery  is  on  the  alert." 

A  few  members  of  the  Vestry,  without  much  reflection,  (?)  ordered  this  "addi- 
tional restoration."  It  is  to  be  hoped,  on  one  account,  that  the  Cross  will 
not  be  again  removed  ;  because  this  outward  emblem  of  Popery,  (which  some 
of  the  wisest  commentators,  as  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  consider  the  "  mark  of  the 
beast")  is  a  very  consistent  badge  of  the  "  Catholic"  theology  of  Oxford. 
The  two  systems  are  as  much  alike  as  two  Crosses. — How  important  that  the 
people  should  be  instructed  in  regard  to  this  new  theology,  which  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Bishop  M'llvaine,  is  "another  gospel,"  and  which  aims  at  changes 
in  the  ecclesiastical  edifice,  both  outward  and  spiritual,  from  corner-stone  to  pe- 
diment! Far  different  from  this  theology  was  the  Episcopacy  of  the  Refor- 
mers ! 


SKETCH  OP  THE  SUPERSTITION  OF  THE  OUTWARD  CROSS. 

Having  given  a  sketch  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  St.  JWary's  Cross,  it  may 
be  interesting  to  extend  our  inquiries  to  the  origin  of  the  general  practice.  The 
general  history  of  the  Cross  will  be  found  hardly  more  evangelical  or  dignified 
than  that  of  St.  Mary's  in  particular.1 

The  Cross,  always  an  object  of  pious  regard  to  the  mind,  was  in  the  first  corrup- 
tions of  Christianity  imitated  externally  by  signs  and  crossings,  such  as  are  now 
common  with  Roman  Catholics.  Tertullian,  A.  D.  200,  is  the  first  to  mention 
these  puerile  manipulations.  But  as  superstition  increased,  it  resorted  to  a  tan- 
gible form,  as  the  means  of  indulging  itself  with  freer  scope.  Hence  the  device 
of  the  outward  emblem.  Nevertheless,  before  the  middle  of  the  fourth  centu- 
ry, Crosses  were  not  used  on  Churches.  According  to  Bingham,  "That  they 
were  not  in  use  for  the  three  first  ages,  seems  evident  enough  from  the  silence 
of  all  the  writers  of  those  times." 


1  The  writer  has  heard  the  re-erection  of  this  Greek  Cross  ascribed  to  a  desire 
to  "compliment"  the  Hector.  This  calls  to  mind  the  anecdote  of  the  French- 
man, who,  going  into  a  Church  for  confession  and  not  finding  the  Priest  there, 
politely  left  his  card  on  tho  Altar  and  gracefully  retired. 


71 

The  practice  of  honoring  external  Crosses  received  an  impulse  from  two 
circumstances,  which  were  swiftly  improved  to  evil  by  the  Popish  tendencies 
of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  Que  circumstance  was  the  miraculous 
sign  which  the  Emperor  Constantino  is  rcpoited  to  have  seen  in  the  heavens.1 
The  other  and  most  influential  circumstance  was  the  reputed  discovery  by 
the  Empress  Helena,  mother  of  Constantino,  of  the  true  Cross  on  which  the 
Saviour  died.  The  story  is,  that  having  discovered  in  digging  at  Golgotha 
three  Crosses,  together  with  the  inscription  written  by  Pilate,  the  Cross  of  the 
Redeemer  was  miraculously  verified  by  its  restoring  a  dead  woman  to  life  !2  The 
Empress  gave  a  part  of  it  to  the  city  of  Jerusalem  where  it  was  enshrined  in 
silver;  and  another  part  to  the  Emperor,  who  considered  it  the  Palladium  of 
Constantinople,  and  had  it  encased  in  his  own  stalue,  around  which  the  people 
were  wont  to  assemble  with  great  homage.  Pilgrims  flocked  in  crowds  to  Je- 
rusalem to  obtain  fragments  of  the  Cross  ;  and  as  so  many  pieces  must  have 
soon  exhausted  the  supply  and  stopped  the  traffic,  the  Cross  was  said  to  be  en- 
dued with  the  power  of  a  miraculous  self-renewal,  by  which  although  contin- 
ually diminished  it  remained  entire.  No  wonder  if,  under  such  encourage- 
ments, it  became  an  object  of  religious  adoration,  and  was  deposited  piecemeal 
on  the  altars  of  Churches  as  a  most  sacred  relic. 

After  this,  history  informs  us  that  the  custom  arose  of  putting  Crosses  over 
the  altars  of  Churches,  and  on  the  "apex  of  the  pediment."  Superstition  mul- 
tiplied the  sacred  emblem  far  and  wide.  Chrysostom,  who  wrote  a  few  years 
after  Helena's  discovery,  says  :  "The  Cross  is  to  be  seen  every  where  in  honour, 
in  the  private  house  and  the  public  market-place,  in  the  desert,  in  the  high-way, 
en  mountains,  in  forests,  on  hills,  on  the  sea,  in  ships,  on  islands,  on  our  beds 
and  on  our  clothes,  on  our  arms,  in  our  chambers,  in  our  banquets,  on  gold  and 
silver  vessels,  on  gems,  in  the  paintings  on  our  walls,  on  the  bodies  of  diseased 
beasts,  on  human  bodies  possessed  by  devils,  in  war  and  peace,  by  day,  by  night, 
in  the  dances  of  feasting  and  the  meetings  of  the  fasting  and  the  praying." 
Two  Cl.urch  festivals  were  speedily  established  in  honour  of  the  Cross ;  one  of 
which  was  called  The  exaltation  of  the  Cross,  because  on  Easter  Sunday  the 
Bishop  of  Jerusalem  ascended  to  a  conspicuous  place,  and  held  up  on  high  a 
piece  of  the  Cross  for  the  veneration  of  the  multitude.  The  history  of  these 
and  of  subsequent  times  bears  abundant  testimony  to  the  idolatrous  reverence 
paid   to    Crosses,  images,   pictures,  relics,  crucifixes,  &c.;  and   shows    that  the 

1  This  miracle  of  Constantino's  Cross  rests  almost  entirely  upon  the  authority 
of  Eusebius,  and  has  been  called  in  question  with  very  great  reason.  Eusebius 
himself  makes  no  mention  of  the  miracle  in  his  ecclesiastical  history,  written 
twelve  years  after  the  event,  although  he  narrates  Constantino's  victory.  The 
first  record  of  it  is  in  his  life  of  the  deceased  Emperor,  after  an  interval  of  a 
quarter  of  a  century.  Other  historians  mention  the  occurrence  as  having  taken 
place  in  a  dream  ;  and  it  is  very  remarkable  that  the  fathers  of  the  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries  (who  were  Dot  averra  to  the  marvellous)  do  not  record  the  mira- 
cle. It  hardly  seems  (o  rest  or.  better  authority  tii.ui  the  miracle  of  Helena, 
which  Chrysostom  narrates  as  true,  and  which  Cyril  gloiifies. 

•  Jlfp.JWwmon,  in  a  long  Essay  on  Miracles,  prefixed  to  F/eurt/'s  Keel.  Hist. 
intimites  his  belief  in  the  miraculous  discovery  of  the  true  Cross.  He  also  ex- 
pressly states  that  the  evidence  in  Favor  of  the  alleged  miracles  of  the  third  and 
fourth  centuries  "  is  applicable  in  defence  of  those  of  the  medieval  period."  and 
by  inference  of  those  of  the  present  times.  According  to  Oxtord  ami  Home, 
miracles  have  never  ceased  in  the  Church.  This  view  is  necessary  in  order  to 
sustain  the  claims  of  tradition  as  a  co-equal  with  Scripture.  If  the  lathers  could 
work  miracles,  then  their  writing*  have  the  same  kind  of  divine  support  as 
those  of  Peter  and  Paul.  Hence  Xetoman  agrees  with  "Catholic  antiquity"  in 
crediting  Helena's  discovery,  and  in  his  general  views  of  the  continuance  of  mi- 
raculous agency.  Who «/#<>,  with  some  ••  reserve,"  entertains  very  similar  sen- 
timents? (Sec  "Oxford  Divinity  by  Bitliop  DoatU  and  Bjsbop  M'llvainc," 
p.  35.) 


72 

■nameful  idolatries  of  saint  and  image  worship,  together  with  the  endless  pue- 
rilities of  Roman  Catholic  ceremonies,  soon  obtained  their  immense  sway. 

For  many  ages,  the  Cross  has  been  specially  identified  with  the  Church  of 
Rome.  Some  of  the  ablest  commentators  have  supposed  it  to  be  the  "  mark-  of 
the  beast,"  so  frequently  mentioned  in  Revelation.  It  is  indeed  the  public  and 
private  badge  of  Anti-christ.  It  is  carried  before  the  Pope  wherever  he  goes.  It 
adorns  the  vestments  of  Popes,  Cardinals,  Bishops  and  Priests;  it  is  erected  in- 
side and  outside  of  their  Churches  ;  it  is  prominent,  both  in  outward  form  and 
by  manipulation,  in  all  their  services  of  religion,  public  or  private.  The  super- 
stitious do  not  consider  an  oath  obligatory,  unless  there  is  a  Cross  on  the  Bible. 
No  Baptism  occurs  without  this  sign  *, — no  Confirmation,  no  Ordination,  no 
marriage,  no  confession  of  sin.  Even  bells  and  images  cannot  be  consecrated, 
or  the  dead  laid  out  for  burial,  or  scarcely  any  act  of  a  public  or  private  nature 
performed,  without  this  Papal  mark.  The  Crusaders  made  the  Cross  their 
standard  of  war;  and  in  the  presence  of  its  form  of  mercy,  the  Inquisitors  have 
ever  slaughtered  the  faithful  witnesses  of  God.  From  the  earliest  beginnings 
of  the  Papal  power,  the  apostasy  has  existed  under  the  form  of  religion  and 
with  the  very  emblem  of  the  crucifixion.  It  is  not  without  reason,  therefore, 
that  the  external  mark  of  Popery  has  been  thought  to  be  the  "  mark  of  the 
beast," 

Sir  Isaac  Nkwton,  whose  reputation  gives  respect  to  his  opinion,  and  who 
studied  and  wrote  upon  the  Book  of  Revelation,  distinctly  declares  that,  in  his 
judgment,  the  "mark  of  the  beast"  is  +  the  Cross.  He  reiterates  the  opinion 
towards  the  close  of  his  dissertation. 

Faber,  a  distinguished  living  writer  on  the  prophecies,  and  also  a  member 
of  the  Church  of  England,  says:  «•  With  regard  to  the  '  mark  of  the  beast,'  I 
think  with  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  it  is  the  Cross." 

Scott  also  in  his  Commentaries  mentions  this  interpretation  favourably. 

Whatever  be  the  interpretation,  it  is  certain  that  the  Oxfordists  are  reviving 
the  acknowledged  symbols  of  Popery.  What  can  be  more  natural  than  that 
those,  who  go  back  to  Popish  doctrines,  should  also  go  back  to  Popish  practices  1 
To  set  up  a  Cross  on  a  Protestant  Church  is  only  a  declaration  that  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Reformation  are  there  growing  in  less  and  less  repute.  This  must 
be  a  matter  of  grief  to  the  evangelical  portion  of  a  Church,  whose  fathers  sealed 
in  blood  their  abhorrence  of  Roman  superstition.  Even  in  the  reign  of  Henry 
VIII,  A.  D.  1535,  the  spirit  of  the  English  people  would  scarcely  tolerate  Crosses 
(Buinet,  I.  p.  135;)  and  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  one  of  her  Bishops,  who 
assisted  in  framing  the  Prayer-Book,  refused  to  preach  in  the  Queen's  chapel 
where  there  was  a  crucifix  over  the  Communion  table  ;  alleging  that  "  the 
matter  of  images  hath  always  been  a  gainsay  since  first  they  entered  into  the 
Church."  (Strype,  jSpp.  22.)  And  another  of  the  divines  of  the  Reformation 
maintained  that,  "from  the  fathers'  own  writings,  for  four  hundred  years  after 
Christ,  there  was  not,  in  th«  place  of  God's  service,  any  such  6ign  [as  the 
Cross]  erected."  (Strype,  ch.  46.)  Yet  in  these  degenerate  <Says,  friend  JVeiuman 
has  placed  in  the  Church  at  Littlemore,  (attached  to  his  own  parish,  St.  Mary's, 
Oxford,)  a  Cross  over  the  Altar,  alter  the  Popish  model.  So  characteristic  of 
Tractarianism  is  the  veneration  of  this  outward  symbol,  that  some  of  its  advo- 
cates have  ventured  to  use  a  Popish  vestment  with  embroidered  Crosses. 
(Ch.  Obs.  38.  p.  174.)  This  system  of  error  will  go  on  developing  itself  both 
in  England  and  in  this  country.  It  will  make  its  insidious  encroachments,  and 
at  last  connect  itself  so  far  with  Popery  that  the  yeomanry  of  the  land,  if  the 
clergy  shrink  back,  must  demand  a  new  Reformation  to  restore  to  them  the  reli- 
gion of  the  Apostles  and   the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel ! 

Thus  it  appears  from  history  that  for  the  first  three  or  four  hundred  years, 
Crosses  were  not  erected  on  Churches — that  they  were  brought  into  use  by  su- 
perstition— that  for  ages  they  have  been  identified  with  Papery — that  at  the 
Reformation  they  were  very  generally  discontinued — that  theywere  once  pulled 
down  at  Burlington—  and  thai  those  frutestunt  clergy  who  now  aim  at  restoring 
them,  are  daily  departing  from  Protestantism  and  moving  step  by  step  (vesti- 
gia nulla  retrorsum)  to  the  dark  regions  of  Popery. 


Princeton  Theological  SemmarH-Speet  j.'ji'jj' 


1    1012  01082  0258 


DATE  DUE 

^___^ 

MAMtiMmfc 

H 

GAYLORD 

PRINTEO  IN  U    S    A. 

